Nicole Brown, amNewYork; Manhattan teen cartoonist prompts review of Scholastic awards’ copyright rules
"“How come the @Scholastic @artandwriting award requires kids to sign over ‘irrevocable copyright’ if they win?! And why is it hidden in the ‘Terms & Conditions’ link that no one reads? Is it weird that I think that’s wrong?” [Sasha Matthews] wrote in December...
...[T]he ability to display the work could be granted through a license, Harvard law professor Lawrence Lessig said.
“Once you enter into a license to promote the work, you have all the permissions you need,” he told amNewYork. “That’s exactly what they could have done here, but rather than entering a license, they just grabbed the copyright.”
Matthews wrote about the copyright issue for a school assignment and got it published in February on the blog Boing Boing."
Showing posts with label license. Show all posts
Showing posts with label license. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 6, 2018
Monday, December 14, 2009
Stanford Dissertations Moving from ProQuest to Google - An interview with Mimi Calter; Stanford University Libraries, 11/20/09
Mary Minow [Executive Editor of the Stanford Copyright and Fair Use Website], via Stanford University Libraries; Stanford Dissertations Moving from ProQuest to Google - An interview with Mimi Calter [Assistant University Librarian & Chief of Staff for Stanford University Libraries & Academic Information Resources]:
"Minow: Stanford is partnering with Google to make student dissertations available worldwide. What does Google bring to the table that simply using the Stanford Digital Repository on its own does not?
Calter: Google provides broad distribution. We'll be using the Stanford Digital Repository for preservation, and we'll be making the dissertations available through our online catalog, but working with Google dramatically increases the visibility of the materials. We think that visibility is an advantage for our students.
In the long run, we hope that other schools will join us in contributing their dissertations to Google, and that "Google Dissertations" will become the go-to resource for dissertations, theses and similar materials.
Minow: What is Stanford's policy on copyright and student dissertations? Are students required to give permission to the University to copy and distribute their dissertations?
Calter: Per Section 5.2 of the Research Policy Handbook (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/DoR/rph/5-2.html), Stanford's students retain copyright in works they create as part of their coursework, including dissertations. Therefore, Stanford does need the students' permission to preserve and distribute those dissertations. As part of the standard submission process, students grant Stanford a license to do so. It is a license only, and students retain full copyright in their work.
The submission process also allows students to apply a Creative Commons license to their work. We hope that this addition will raise awareness of the Creative Commons option, and further increase the accessibility of these materials.
Minow: I understand that this move away from ProQuest means that Stanford student work will no longer be included in Dissertation Abstracts unless the student makes an affirmative effort to submit to ProQuest. What are the implications for the broader research world of such a step?
Calter: It is a concern, but our sense is that the wide availability and visibility of the dissertations through the Stanford catalog and Google will more than compensate for the lack of a listing in Dissertation Abstracts.
Minow: Google has been harvesting electronic dissertations for several years. How does Stanford's submission of the dissertations differ from Google's past practices?
Calter: The submission process that Stanford is using is similar to the one that publishers are using for Google Book Search. So we'll be submitting metadata along with the dissertation files, and expect to have more descriptive listings than just titles."
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/commentary_and_analysis/2009_11_calter.html
"Minow: Stanford is partnering with Google to make student dissertations available worldwide. What does Google bring to the table that simply using the Stanford Digital Repository on its own does not?
Calter: Google provides broad distribution. We'll be using the Stanford Digital Repository for preservation, and we'll be making the dissertations available through our online catalog, but working with Google dramatically increases the visibility of the materials. We think that visibility is an advantage for our students.
In the long run, we hope that other schools will join us in contributing their dissertations to Google, and that "Google Dissertations" will become the go-to resource for dissertations, theses and similar materials.
Minow: What is Stanford's policy on copyright and student dissertations? Are students required to give permission to the University to copy and distribute their dissertations?
Calter: Per Section 5.2 of the Research Policy Handbook (http://www.stanford.edu/dept/DoR/rph/5-2.html), Stanford's students retain copyright in works they create as part of their coursework, including dissertations. Therefore, Stanford does need the students' permission to preserve and distribute those dissertations. As part of the standard submission process, students grant Stanford a license to do so. It is a license only, and students retain full copyright in their work.
The submission process also allows students to apply a Creative Commons license to their work. We hope that this addition will raise awareness of the Creative Commons option, and further increase the accessibility of these materials.
Minow: I understand that this move away from ProQuest means that Stanford student work will no longer be included in Dissertation Abstracts unless the student makes an affirmative effort to submit to ProQuest. What are the implications for the broader research world of such a step?
Calter: It is a concern, but our sense is that the wide availability and visibility of the dissertations through the Stanford catalog and Google will more than compensate for the lack of a listing in Dissertation Abstracts.
Minow: Google has been harvesting electronic dissertations for several years. How does Stanford's submission of the dissertations differ from Google's past practices?
Calter: The submission process that Stanford is using is similar to the one that publishers are using for Google Book Search. So we'll be submitting metadata along with the dissertation files, and expect to have more descriptive listings than just titles."
http://fairuse.stanford.edu/commentary_and_analysis/2009_11_calter.html
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
Photographer wins copyright ruling; Guardian, 10/26/09
Roy Greenslade, Guardian; Photographer wins copyright ruling:
"The high court made a ruling on 16 October that has important ramifications for newspaper and magazine publishers and photographers, but it appears to have slipped under the mainstream media radar.
Judges found in favour of a freelance photographer Alan Grisbrook who had sued Mirror Group Newspapers for infringing his copyright in archived images.
In a 2002 consent order, following a previous legal action taken by Grisbrook against MGN over unpaid licence fees, MGN agreed to delete all electronic copies of his photos from its systems.
So when Grisbrook discovered last year that MGN were making available back copies of their titles to paying customers through websites, and that these contained some of his images, he believed MGN were infringing his copyright and breaching the previous consent order.
He said that he had never consented to the inclusion of his images in the group's back numbers database nor on their websites.
MGN argued that the use of the images was in the public interest, and that Grisbrook's licence extended to back copy editions archived electronically.
Following the ruling, technology lawyer Tom Cowling said that photographers should look at their licences.
If they have licensed images to a newspaper which, like MGN, is making back copies of their editions available online to paid subscribers, they may well have a claim in copyright infringement if their licence agreement did not clearly allow such use."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2009/oct/26/trinity-mirror-medialaw
"The high court made a ruling on 16 October that has important ramifications for newspaper and magazine publishers and photographers, but it appears to have slipped under the mainstream media radar.
Judges found in favour of a freelance photographer Alan Grisbrook who had sued Mirror Group Newspapers for infringing his copyright in archived images.
In a 2002 consent order, following a previous legal action taken by Grisbrook against MGN over unpaid licence fees, MGN agreed to delete all electronic copies of his photos from its systems.
So when Grisbrook discovered last year that MGN were making available back copies of their titles to paying customers through websites, and that these contained some of his images, he believed MGN were infringing his copyright and breaching the previous consent order.
He said that he had never consented to the inclusion of his images in the group's back numbers database nor on their websites.
MGN argued that the use of the images was in the public interest, and that Grisbrook's licence extended to back copy editions archived electronically.
Following the ruling, technology lawyer Tom Cowling said that photographers should look at their licences.
If they have licensed images to a newspaper which, like MGN, is making back copies of their editions available online to paid subscribers, they may well have a claim in copyright infringement if their licence agreement did not clearly allow such use."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2009/oct/26/trinity-mirror-medialaw
Thursday, October 9, 2008
Dear Bands: No Matter How Much You Dislike John McCain, He Can Most Likely Use Your Song - Techdirt, 10/9/08
Dear Bands: No Matter How Much You Dislike John McCain, He Can Most Likely Use Your Song:
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081009/0139482501.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20081009/0139482501.shtml
Monday, September 8, 2008
Copyright Clearance Center Expands Blanket Pricing Offer - Chronicle of Higher Education, 9/8/08
Copyright Clearance Center Expands Blanket Pricing Offer: "The Copyright Clearance Center, which helps colleges buy rights to reprint journal articles, book chapters, and other material in course packs and for other uses, now offers its blanket-pricing option to large institutions that were previously ineligible. And it has signed up one of the country’s largest universities, the University of Texas at Austin." http://chronicle.com/wiredcampus/index.php?id=3299&utm_source=wc&utm_medium=en
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)