Talk:Copyright - Revision history

David Haslam: /* Form letters section is too narrow in terms of app coverage */ new section

2017-10-11T21:38:14Z

‎Form letters section is too narrow in terms of app coverage: new section

David Haslam: /* Fair Use : Four prongs or five? */ ::: Thanks. ~~~~

2013-02-07T14:53:34Z

‎Fair Use : Four prongs or five?: ::: Thanks. ~~~~

David Haslam: /* Mixed content */ new section

2013-02-07T14:52:07Z

‎Mixed content: new section

Osk: /* Crown copyright & the DMCA */

2013-02-07T05:31:34Z

‎Crown copyright & the DMCA

Osk at 05:31, 7 February 2013

2013-02-07T05:31:12Z

Osk: /* Fair Use : Four prongs or five? */

2013-02-07T05:15:02Z

‎Fair Use : Four prongs or five?

David Haslam: /* Form letter for Go Bible users */ :We can also use Go Bible as a "bargaining chip".

2010-01-08T15:35:48Z

‎Form letter for Go Bible users: :We can also use Go Bible as a "bargaining chip".

David Haslam: /* 128-bit encryption */ new section

2009-08-26T16:52:07Z

‎128-bit encryption: new section

David Haslam: /* Fair Use : Four prongs or five? */ :Mended. ~~~~

2009-03-24T20:05:20Z

‎Fair Use : Four prongs or five?: :Mended. ~~~~

David Haslam: /* Form letters */ ::If you use a tabbed browser,

2009-03-24T20:03:05Z

‎Form letters: ::If you use a tabbed browser,

← Older revision		Revision as of 21:38, 11 October 2017
Line 43:		Line 43:

	Sometimes a public domain text is published in an edition containing new copyright material interspersed within the main body of the work. This has been seen (for example) when a PD Bible translation has been republished with headings, footnotes, cross-references, linguistic markup and other features, none of which were present in the original work. In such cases, one must take great care before assuming that any of the work can be re-purposed, including what (in theory at least) was the original PD text. Better to find an alternative electronic source for the original PD text. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 07:52, 7 February 2013 (MST)		Sometimes a public domain text is published in an edition containing new copyright material interspersed within the main body of the work. This has been seen (for example) when a PD Bible translation has been republished with headings, footnotes, cross-references, linguistic markup and other features, none of which were present in the original work. In such cases, one must take great care before assuming that any of the work can be re-purposed, including what (in theory at least) was the original PD text. Better to find an alternative electronic source for the original PD text. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 07:52, 7 February 2013 (MST)
		+
		+	== Form letters section is too narrow in terms of app coverage ==
		+
		+	Things have changed radically since this page was first made. Giving advice about form letters that's particular to '''only three''' front-end apps is no longer what we need. Making no mention of '''PocketSword''' or '''And-Bible''' makes no sense either, now that smart phones and tablets are so popular.
		+
		+	We could do with a '''standard form letter''' that briefly describes the wide range of apps we support, with the main focus on being requesting written permission to distribute the relevant content by CrossWire in the form of a SWORD module.
		+
		+	[[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] ([[User talk:David Haslam\|talk]]) 15:38, 11 October 2017 (MDT)

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 :Mended. [[User:David Haslam|David Haslam]] 20:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 ::Even better would have been to correct the five points to reflect the four prongs rather than uncritically decide that the problem was one of enumeration. --[[User:Osk|Osk]] 22:15, 6 February 2013 (MST)
 == Form letters ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 14:52, 7 February 2013
Line 38:		Line 38:

	Removed from article: "Even in the USA, under the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act Digital Millennium Copyright Act], the text of the KJV is protected by mutual treaties with the UK relating to copyright law." This is most probably false. Without reference to a knowledgeable source, it's not appropriate to pronounce it as if it were uncontroversial fact. Specifically, I propose that KJV printing in the UK is not restrained by copyright but by letters patent. While UK copyrights are observed within the US, there is no similar observation of UK letters patent. The KJV is in the public domain everywhere in the world. Printing restrictions within the UK are not caused by copyright law. They are caused by (effectively similar but unrelated) letters patent that restrict printing by fiat. The US won a war in 1783, one effect of which is that British royal fiat is not observed in the US. --[[User:Osk\|Osk]] 22:31, 6 February 2013 (MST)		Removed from article: "Even in the USA, under the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act Digital Millennium Copyright Act], the text of the KJV is protected by mutual treaties with the UK relating to copyright law." This is most probably false. Without reference to a knowledgeable source, it's not appropriate to pronounce it as if it were uncontroversial fact. Specifically, I propose that KJV printing in the UK is not restrained by copyright but by letters patent. While UK copyrights are observed within the US, there is no similar observation of UK letters patent. The KJV is in the public domain everywhere in the world. Printing restrictions within the UK are not caused by copyright law. They are caused by (effectively similar but unrelated) letters patent that restrict printing by fiat. The US won a war in 1783, one effect of which is that British royal fiat is not observed in the US. --[[User:Osk\|Osk]] 22:31, 6 February 2013 (MST)
		+
		+	== Mixed content ==
		+
		+	Sometimes a public domain text is published in an edition containing new copyright material interspersed within the main body of the work. This has been seen (for example) when a PD Bible translation has been republished with headings, footnotes, cross-references, linguistic markup and other features, none of which were present in the original work. In such cases, one must take great care before assuming that any of the work can be re-purposed, including what (in theory at least) was the original PD text. Better to find an alternative electronic source for the original PD text. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 07:52, 7 February 2013 (MST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:31, 7 February 2013
Line 37:		Line 37:
	== Crown copyright & the DMCA ==		== Crown copyright & the DMCA ==

−	Removed from article: "Even in the USA, under the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act Digital Millennium Copyright Act], the text of the KJV is protected by mutual treaties with the UK relating to copyright law." This is most probably false. Without reference to a knowledgeable source, it's not appropriate to pronounce it as if it were uncontroversial fact. Specifically, I propose that KJV printing in the UK is not restrained by copyright but by letters patent. While UK copyrights are observed within the US, there is no similar observation of UK letters patent. The KJV is in the public domain everywhere in the world. Printing restrictions within the UK are not caused by copyright law. They are caused by (effectively similar but unrelated) letters patent that restrict printing by fiat. The US won a war in 1783, one effect of which is that British royal fiat is not observed in the US.	+	Removed from article: "Even in the USA, under the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act Digital Millennium Copyright Act], the text of the KJV is protected by mutual treaties with the UK relating to copyright law." This is most probably false. Without reference to a knowledgeable source, it's not appropriate to pronounce it as if it were uncontroversial fact. Specifically, I propose that KJV printing in the UK is not restrained by copyright but by letters patent. While UK copyrights are observed within the US, there is no similar observation of UK letters patent. The KJV is in the public domain everywhere in the world. Printing restrictions within the UK are not caused by copyright law. They are caused by (effectively similar but unrelated) letters patent that restrict printing by fiat. The US won a war in 1783, one effect of which is that British royal fiat is not observed in the US. --[[User:Osk\|Osk]] 22:31, 6 February 2013 (MST)

← Older revision		Revision as of 05:31, 7 February 2013
Line 34:		Line 34:

	This is the only page in the wiki that mentions '''encryption'''. We could do with some more detailed description of how this works for protecting SWORD modules. Encryption is normally used to hide secrets, yet the text of any module is not intended to be secret but to be studied by everyone who purchases such a locked module! So what are we really trying to achieve by encryption here? Copy-protection is not the same as information security. And there is no such thing as security by obscurity. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 16:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)		This is the only page in the wiki that mentions '''encryption'''. We could do with some more detailed description of how this works for protecting SWORD modules. Encryption is normally used to hide secrets, yet the text of any module is not intended to be secret but to be studied by everyone who purchases such a locked module! So what are we really trying to achieve by encryption here? Copy-protection is not the same as information security. And there is no such thing as security by obscurity. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 16:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	== Crown copyright & the DMCA ==
		+
		+	Removed from article: "Even in the USA, under the [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Millennium_Copyright_Act Digital Millennium Copyright Act], the text of the KJV is protected by mutual treaties with the UK relating to copyright law." This is most probably false. Without reference to a knowledgeable source, it's not appropriate to pronounce it as if it were uncontroversial fact. Specifically, I propose that KJV printing in the UK is not restrained by copyright but by letters patent. While UK copyrights are observed within the US, there is no similar observation of UK letters patent. The KJV is in the public domain everywhere in the world. Printing restrictions within the UK are not caused by copyright law. They are caused by (effectively similar but unrelated) letters patent that restrict printing by fiat. The US won a war in 1783, one effect of which is that British royal fiat is not observed in the US.

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:35, 8 January 2010
Line 17:		Line 17:

	We need to draft a form letter template for '''Go Bible''' users. This will need to cover the subtle technical point that Go Bible is not a direct '''Frontend''' for the SWORD engine ''per se''. The template should be worded in such a way that (if successfully lobbied) will result in obtaining permissions for distribution both as SWORD modules and as Go Bible applications for mobile phones. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 20:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)		We need to draft a form letter template for '''Go Bible''' users. This will need to cover the subtle technical point that Go Bible is not a direct '''Frontend''' for the SWORD engine ''per se''. The template should be worded in such a way that (if successfully lobbied) will result in obtaining permissions for distribution both as SWORD modules and as Go Bible applications for mobile phones. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 20:21, 19 February 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	:We can also use Go Bible as a "bargaining chip". Offer the copyright owners the development technical support to enable them to host a Go Bible version from their own website. Sometimes the offer of such free assistance can reap very positive progress in collaboration on SWORD module permissions. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 15:35, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

	== Why do we suggest offering to pay a small fee at this first approach? ==		== Why do we suggest offering to pay a small fee at this first approach? ==

← Older revision		Revision as of 16:52, 26 August 2009
Line 27:		Line 27:

	One of the paragraphs mentions a SWORD CD. There is no description of the SWORD CD in the CrossWire wiki. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 19:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)		One of the paragraphs mentions a SWORD CD. There is no description of the SWORD CD in the CrossWire wiki. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 19:59, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
		+
		+	== 128-bit encryption ==
		+
		+	This is the only page in the wiki that mentions '''encryption'''. We could do with some more detailed description of how this works for protecting SWORD modules. Encryption is normally used to hide secrets, yet the text of any module is not intended to be secret but to be studied by everyone who purchases such a locked module! So what are we really trying to achieve by encryption here? Copy-protection is not the same as information security. And there is no such thing as security by obscurity. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 16:52, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 20:05, 24 March 2009
Line 2:		Line 2:

	The section on '''Fair Use''' includes the phrase "four prong test", which is immediately followed by '''five''' bullet points! [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 13:32, 7 December 2008 (UTC)		The section on '''Fair Use''' includes the phrase "four prong test", which is immediately followed by '''five''' bullet points! [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 13:32, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
		+	:Mended. [[User:David Haslam\|David Haslam]] 20:05, 24 March 2009 (UTC)

	== Form letters ==		== Form letters ==

@@ Line 7: / Line 7: @@
 I suggest that the '''form letters''' be moved to a separate new page, so the main article length is reduced. [[User:David Haslam|David Haslam]] 13:42, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
 :Done. [[User:David Haslam|David Haslam]] 19:54, 24 March 2009 (UTC)
 == Avoiding duplication in copyright lobbying ==