Re: VMs: Re: VMS images and copyright

[Walter Ogburn <ogburn@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Jan,

In the end I agree with you about what we should do, but I want to be clear on 
the reasons.  Let's break this up into two different categories.  The first 
category is the law, and the second is courtesy.

The law:

No copyright really does mean no control.  On what basis can this be 
contested?  Any agreement between the library and the authors of the 
Churchill / Kennedy book is irrelevant to the rest of us, because a contract 
can only bind the parties to that contract.  The Bridgeman decision and the 
library's own response to GC agree that these images are in the public 
domain.  That means no legal restrictions at all, and permission is 
completely irrelevant.  I suggest reading the Bridgeman decision - it's quite 
readable and considers a very similar situation.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/copyright/cases/36_FSupp2d_191.htm

Courtesy:

We should respect the effort and money that have gone into making these 
images.  Proper attribution and credit are certainly in order, and any 
commercial product using the images should seek the library's blessing first.  
It seems that all they ask is proper acknowledgement and a courtesy copy.   
This is very reasonable and we should honor it.  This is where I completely 
agree with you, but as a matter of good manners, not a legal obligation.

I hope this makes things clearer.
- Walter


On Sunday 20 June 2004 04:30 am, Jan wrote:
> Hello Walter,
>
>
>
> ======= At 2004-06-19, 21:41:00 you wrote: =======
>
> >(If they don't hold copyright, then Beinecke has no legal control at all -
> > you can use and distribute them for free, for profit, modified,
> > unmodified, whatever you want.)
>
> This statement can be surely contested. True, they could not have made it
> more public then by posting  it on net with encouragement for downloads.
> But that's where their permission stops - they  did incurred high expenses
> for the scanning etc., so profiteering is certainly out of line and anybody
> who would charge more than expenses for the copies  could be branded that
> way.
>
> All this is actually only a speculation. Why don't you directly tell
> Beinecke what you intend to do and ask their permission?  Especially when
> you will charge only expenses? They of course do have the right  to be the
> first to do that themselves. If they decline, they may not have further
> grounds for refusing the approval, but that is still not enough.  On the
> other hand, the coincidence of VM scanning and the new book by
> Churchill/Kennedy  may suggest  that the initiative for scanning came from
> authors. After all, one of the authors is the relative of Mr. Voynich. Now
> if for instance the above book may present some scans as well, you may have
> a problem  - we do not know what their agreement was.
>
> Jan
>
>
>
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
> unsubscribe vms-list
______________________________________________________________________
To unsubscribe, send mail to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxx with a body saying:
unsubscribe vms-list