Copyright

Facebook Twitter

Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) is a United States copyright law that implements two 1996 treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO).

Digital Millennium Copyright Act

It criminalizes production and dissemination of technology, devices, or services intended to circumvent measures (commonly known as digital rights management or DRM) that control access to copyrighted works. It also criminalizes the act of circumventing an access control, whether or not there is actual infringement of copyright itself. Re: Wikipedia and Commons screenshots of GNU programms.

[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index] Re: Wikipedia and Commons screenshots of GNU programms Scripsit Patrick-Emil Zörner <paddyez@yahoo.de> > My question is the following:is there a policy or rule of if and how > screenshots of GNU programs may be published?

Re: Wikipedia and Commons screenshots of GNU programms

You would be better off asking that question of the FSF. This mailing list is for discussing the legal aspects of including things in the Debian operating system. That being said, most of the screenshots you link to could not reasonably be covered by the copyright (or other intellectual property rights) of the programs whose output are being depicted. Right to quote. Right to quote is a legal concept in continental Europe, which some people consider similar to fair use.[1] It allows for quoting excerpts of copyrighted works, as long as the cited paragraphs are within a reasonable limit (varying from country to country), clearly marked as quotations and fully referenced, and if the resulting new work is not just a collection of quotations, but constitutes a fully original work in itself.

Right to quote

In some countries the intended use of the work (educational, scientific, parodist, etc.) may also be a factor determining the scope of this right. France[edit] In France, it is illegal to reproduce someone's work without their approval. But if the work is published, i.e. no longer being edited prior to release, small quotations are legal.[2] Fair dealing: Encyclopedia II - Fair dealing - Fair dealing in Singapore. The Making Of - Hard Truths to Keep Singapore Going This is produced by The Strait's Times' RazorTV.

Fair dealing: Encyclopedia II - Fair dealing - Fair dealing in Singapore

Sorry for the low quality. NO COPYRIGHT INFRINGEMENT INTENDED Under the provisi... Copyright Act. Marginal note:Telecommunication 2.3 A person who communicates a work or other subject-matter to the public by telecommunication does not by that act alone perform it in public, nor by that act alone is deemed to authorize its performance in public.

Copyright Act

Marginal note:Communication to the public by telecommunication. Fair dealing. Fair dealing is a limitation and exception to the exclusive right granted by copyright law to the author of a creative work, which is found in many of the common law jurisdictions of the Commonwealth of Nations.

Fair dealing

Fair dealing is an enumerated set of possible defences against an action for infringement of an exclusive right of copyright. Unlike the related United States doctrine of fair use, fair dealing cannot apply to any act which does not fall within one of these categories. In practice, common law courts might rule that actions with a commercial character, which might be naïvely assumed to fall into one of these categories, were in fact infringements of copyright as fair dealing is not as flexible a concept as the American concept of fair use.

Fair dealing by country[edit] What the "jailbreak" exemption says about the future of copyright law. I dashed off a piece for CNET today on the Copyright Office’s cell phone “jailbreaking” rulemaking earlier this week.

What the "jailbreak" exemption says about the future of copyright law

Though there has already been extensive coverage (including solid pieces in The Washington Post, a New York Times editorial, CNET, and Techdirt), there were a few interesting aspects to the decision I thought were worth highlighting. Most notably, I was interested that no one had discussed the possibility and process by which Apple or other service providers could appeal the rulemaking. Ordinarily, parties who object to rules enrolled by administrative agencies can file suit in federal district court under the Administrative Procedures Act. Such suits are difficult to win, as courts give deference to administrative determinations and review them only for errors of law. But a win for the agency is by no means guaranteed. Copyright Law: Chapter 1. And Related Laws Contained in Title 17 of the United States Code Circular 92 § 101 .

Copyright Law: Chapter 1

Definitions2.