Re: FDL attribution by reference was Re: [Wikipedia-l] FDLused to stifle distribution of articles

On Mon, 1 Dec 2003, Alex T. wrote:

> From: "Andre Engels" <[email protected]>
>
> This sounds something like how fair use has been interpreted under US law.
> One reason it is hard to analyze these statutes is that the terminology may
> not
> be translated into English in a manner consistent with English legal
> terminology,
> and thus it would be useful to have individuals with some knowledge of these
> various foreign laws who could provide some context for them to the
> international Wikipedia communities.

I did a websearch, and the article is indeed 'fair use' like. Basically, it
allows cases where the used material is only the 'inducement' for an
independent work, rather than the new work a mere 'different version' of the
material. Important is that the used material 'pales before' the original
material. Still, I could not get the sources agree on what exactly would be
allowed and disallowed: http://www.lehrer-online.de/dyn/9.asp?url=362087.htm
basically says that when there is still some protected part of the work
visible (e.g. in the third example, the chapter and subchapter division of a
study book is directly copied, but none of the text), it does not fall under
this article, but http://www.kunstrecht.de/news/00urh08.htm states an example
where a parody, consisting of 58 seconds from the parodied work, and 25
seconds original work, was considered to be allowable under this article.

Andre Engels