Re: Textbook-l Digest, Vol 33, Issue 8

What I consider terrifying is the fact that the statute of limitations
for copyright infringement in the United States is very ambiguous:
technically, it is only three years, but there are numerous
contradictory cases.

Consider this example. I publish a book in August 2005. Another person
copies an entire chapter in December 2005 without permission and for
profit, directly infringing upon my exclusive right to the material,
including it in their book. Their book is published September 2006. A
second edition is published September 2007. It is still on the market
for several years to come. Courts might consider the December 2005
copy the original date of infringement, others might consider the
September 2006, the 2007, or even the later dates when the book is
still being published. Furthermore, there is ambiguity as to whether
one can sue for damages only based on the past three years, or on the
entire time the infringement (in this case) was in print.

I know that it is pure speculation and copyright paranoia, but it is
frightening. Also, I want to say that even if we decide what we would
like to limit (or outright ban) regarding fair use, we should: (1)
wait for the official statement from the board and (2) get help from
foundation-l or more qualified legal personnel. But I would certainly
support discussion about what we would like to allow or disallow.
Also, I think we should seriously consider cleaning out our fair use
archives...I can testify from roving through the subcategories of
[[:Category:Wikibooks images]] that we have a lot of things that
should never be considered fair use.

-Iamunknown

On 2/16/07, Andrew Whitworth <[email protected]> wrote:
> It's more then just our legal risk in keeping those images and text. Under
> US copyright law, we should be legally allowed to use some copyrighted
> material under fair use guidelines without causing any problems. There are
> several problems with fair use:
> 1) Fair Use only applies in the US and a small handful of other countries.
> In countries where fair use is not legal, all instances of it are considered
> copyright infringement. In these countries, it is not legal to print or
> distribute wikibooks containing fair use media.
> 2) Fair use, or other limited licensing (such as "the author allows this
> image to be used on wikibooks only") reduces our ability to print,
> distribute, and modify our texts. Derivative works, a cornerstone of the
> GFDL are not compatable with fair use, and using two incompatable licenses
> on a single aggregate project (such as a wikibook) is simply not possible.
> 3) Many people assume that text or an image can be released under fair use
> when it can't be. Images that are uploaded under "fair use" are usually (as
> you pointed out) not properly tagged or referenced. These instances of
> misuse do constitute copyright infringement, and that could bring lawsuits.
> We allowed fair use for a pretty long time on our project, but it isn't the
> kind of fight that we should be pursuing any longer. There are too many
> problems with it. -
>
> --Andrew Whitworth (Whiteknight)
>
>
> >From: "Matthew Benedict" <[email protected]>
> >Reply-To: Wikimedia textbook discussion <[email protected]>
> >To: [email protected]
> >Subject: Re: [Textbook-l] Textbook-l Digest, Vol 33, Issue 8
> >Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 12:07:29 -0500
> >
> >Now that I have thought some more about it, I do feel that the use of
> >fair use images should be limited, but the problem is where do we draw
> >the line? We'd have to ask ourselves if the value of using the images
> >in the book outweighs the legal risk of listing it under fair use,
> >especially if the books will eventually be published in some manner,
> >as I presume is one eventual goal for any book on the project. I think
> >that only in extreme cases (such as maybe those european history
> >images) should fair use be presumed, and these cases should be clearly
> >defined, perhaps on a case-by-case or strict categorical basis.
> >
> >As for textual quotations, I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that the
> >presumption of fair use for these (provided they are properly cited of
> >course) is more common than the presumption of fair use for images. If
> >we're going to do that we'll need some kind of standard method to
> >describe the rationale for the fair use argument, like wikipedia has
> >for images (i.e. this is a screenshot used only for illustration, this
> >is a low-res company logo used to show what it looks like, etc).
> >
> >Speaking of citation, one problem with current fair use images is that
> >a lot of them don't really cite the source properly; i.e. who created
> >it? From what source was it derived? This information should be in the
> >image page, but often they just have descriptions of what the image
> >is, not where it came from or who the current copyright holder is,
> >which can cause problems of its own.
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Mattb112885
> >
> >
> >On 2/16/07, textbook-l-request-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
> ><textbook-l-request-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org> wrote:
> > > Send Textbook-l mailing list submissions to
> > >         [email protected]
> > >
> > > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> > >         http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
> > > or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> > >         textbook-l-request-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
> > >
> > > You can reach the person managing the list at
> > >         textbook-l-owner-RusutVdil2icGmH+5r0DM0B+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org
> > >
> > > When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> > > than "Re: Contents of Textbook-l digest..."
> > >
> > > Today's Topics:
> > >
> > >    1. Regarding fair use (Iamunknown)
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > From: Iamunknown <[email protected]>
> > > To: [email protected]
> > > Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2007 00:52:49 -0700
> > > Subject: [Textbook-l] Regarding fair use
> > > I really don't want fair use to go totally away, but I agree that it
> >should
> > > be significantly limited. The clause, "Because of our commitment to free
> > > content, this non-free media should not be used when it is reasonably
> > > possible to replace with free media that would serve the same
> >educational
> > > purpose," in Kat Walsh's statement comes to mind. While I have expreseed
> > > concern on-wiki and on-mailing list before about unlicensed images, many
> > > which, if licensed properly, would remained unlicensed and used under
> >fair
> > > use, I think that we should not outright ban unlicensed content used
> >under
> > > fair use. In particular, we should allow very very limited use of
> >non-free
> > > media when it would be practically impossible to use free media -- the
> >media
> > > used in the European History wikibook comes to mind -- and for small
> >textual
> > > quotations. What are everyone else's feelings?
> > >
> > > -Iamunknown
> > >
> > >
> > > --===============8126416904983688626==--
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > Textbook-l mailing list
> > > [email protected]
> > > http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
> > >
> > >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Textbook-l mailing list
> >[email protected]
> >http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Find a local pizza place, movie theater, and more….then map the best route!
> http://maps.live.com/?icid=hmtag1&FORM=MGAC01
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Textbook-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/textbook-l
>
>