does anyone really know what the copyright issues are with go problems? can problems have a copyright? or only problem collections and explanatory text?
adum
{Posted by admin}
Copyrights and Problems
-
Thomas Derz
The alltime-copyright question
[quote]
does anyone really know what the copyright issues are with go problems? can problems have a copyright? or only problem collections and explanatory text?
adum
[/quote]
Adum, you are right that this question must be answered once and for all suffiently and satisfyingly.
This was was my first question once in the 'Discussion' as well.
1) Copyright infringement requires the copying of a protected work or, in the absence of exact copying, requires proof of both substantial similarity and access to the copyrighted work [Lipton v Nature Company, 71 F.3d 464, 470-71, 37 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1012, 1016 (2d Cir.1995)].
2) For a work to be protected by copyright, it must entail some amount of originality and a minimal amount of creativity [see Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv., Inc., 494 U.S. 340, 345, 18 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1275, 1278 (1991)].
Point 2) will usually be given when some member of our problem contributing community opens a book and sees an interesting problem.
However, here comes the difference to copyright infringement under point 1):
a) we do only take one problem at a time,
b) we add our own introduction, comments and any explanatory text,
c) we add many (novel) wrong-solution diagrams with novel text and
d) we have a completely novel lay-out,
e) in a new medium.
Our adaption of the original works - consisting of editorial revisions, elaborations and other modifications - are sufficient to meet the test for originality** under copyright law.
Not and never the whole book is copied*, without amendments or additions in the same lay-out.
The sometimes small borderline between normal journalism and plagiat, called copyright, is widened here to a great canyon distinguishing the original book source and our work!
(*Everyone is entitled to quote some sentences for free from any article in newspapers etc. or books. It just happened that I enquired at the New York Times whether I could use their recent articles on Go. In first instance they wanted to charge me 100$US, but in the end I was allowed to quote parts for free. It also played and makes a difference that we are non-coomercial.)
The correct conclusion is: OUR common work** is copyrighted - if we say so (Adam put the circled c on the bottom of the page) - and we do not infringe copyright!
So much for now, I hope this settles the question sufficiently
Greetings to everyone,
Tommie
{Posted by Thomas Derz}
does anyone really know what the copyright issues are with go problems? can problems have a copyright? or only problem collections and explanatory text?
adum
[/quote]
Adum, you are right that this question must be answered once and for all suffiently and satisfyingly.
This was was my first question once in the 'Discussion' as well.
1) Copyright infringement requires the copying of a protected work or, in the absence of exact copying, requires proof of both substantial similarity and access to the copyrighted work [Lipton v Nature Company, 71 F.3d 464, 470-71, 37 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1012, 1016 (2d Cir.1995)].
2) For a work to be protected by copyright, it must entail some amount of originality and a minimal amount of creativity [see Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Tel. Serv., Inc., 494 U.S. 340, 345, 18 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1275, 1278 (1991)].
Point 2) will usually be given when some member of our problem contributing community opens a book and sees an interesting problem.
However, here comes the difference to copyright infringement under point 1):
a) we do only take one problem at a time,
b) we add our own introduction, comments and any explanatory text,
c) we add many (novel) wrong-solution diagrams with novel text and
d) we have a completely novel lay-out,
e) in a new medium.
Our adaption of the original works - consisting of editorial revisions, elaborations and other modifications - are sufficient to meet the test for originality** under copyright law.
Not and never the whole book is copied*, without amendments or additions in the same lay-out.
The sometimes small borderline between normal journalism and plagiat, called copyright, is widened here to a great canyon distinguishing the original book source and our work!
(*Everyone is entitled to quote some sentences for free from any article in newspapers etc. or books. It just happened that I enquired at the New York Times whether I could use their recent articles on Go. In first instance they wanted to charge me 100$US, but in the end I was allowed to quote parts for free. It also played and makes a difference that we are non-coomercial.)
The correct conclusion is: OUR common work** is copyrighted - if we say so (Adam put the circled c on the bottom of the page) - and we do not infringe copyright!
So much for now, I hope this settles the question sufficiently
Greetings to everyone,
Tommie
{Posted by Thomas Derz}
-
Thomas Derz
Perhaps I should answer your two specific questions very clearly:
'(1) can problems have a copyright? (2) or only problem collections and explanatory text?'
(1) I think not. We do not say we composed the problem, rather cite the copyrighted source.
(2) Yes, as I tried to make clear above.
Check for example Prof. Field's IP intro chapters 5-7 on Copyright:
http://www.PIERCELAW.EDU/tfield/IIPBk/Ch5.pdf
Or google a little bit around,as I did.
Further:
copyright forms:
http://www.loc.gov/copyright/forms/
opyright form to register visual arts works (short)
copyright application form for the US: http://www.PIERCELAW.EDU/tfield/IIPBk/supp/formTX.pdf,
Copyright form to register text works (with instructions),
http://www.PIERCELAW.EDU/tfield/IIPBk/supp/formVA.pdf
Greeting to all,
Tommie
{Posted by Thomas Derz}
'(1) can problems have a copyright? (2) or only problem collections and explanatory text?'
(1) I think not. We do not say we composed the problem, rather cite the copyrighted source.
(2) Yes, as I tried to make clear above.
Check for example Prof. Field's IP intro chapters 5-7 on Copyright:
http://www.PIERCELAW.EDU/tfield/IIPBk/Ch5.pdf
Or google a little bit around,as I did.
Further:
copyright forms:
http://www.loc.gov/copyright/forms/
opyright form to register visual arts works (short)
copyright application form for the US: http://www.PIERCELAW.EDU/tfield/IIPBk/supp/formTX.pdf,
Copyright form to register text works (with instructions),
http://www.PIERCELAW.EDU/tfield/IIPBk/supp/formVA.pdf
Greeting to all,
Tommie
{Posted by Thomas Derz}
-
Thomas Derz
Copyright
In adition to all above, the old German proverb 'If there is no plaintiff, there will be no judge/prosecutor' ('Wo kein Kläger, da kein Richter') prevails.
All of these actions won't happen: ( http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Terrorism/form-letter.html )
'Allegations of Copyright Violation / Digital Millennium Copyright Act
The claims of copyright violation should be rejected because:
>
The material in question is not copyrighted, or the copyright has expired. It is therefore in the public
domain and may be reproduced by anyone.
>
The complainant has provided no copyright registration information or other tangible evidence that
the material in question is in fact copyrighted, and I have a good faith belief that it is not. The
allegation of copyright violation is therefore in dispute, and at present unsupported.
>
The complainant does not hold the copyright to the material in question, is not the designated
representative of the copyright holder, and therefore lacks standing to assert that my use of the
material is a violation of any of the owner's rights.
>
My use of the material is legally protected because it falls within the "fair use" provision of the
copyright regulations, as defined in 17 USC 107. If the complainant disagrees that this is fair use,
they are free to take up the matter with me directly, in the courts. You, the ISP, are under no
obligation to settle this dispute, or to take any action to restrict my speech at the behest of this
complainant. Furthermore, siding with the complainant in a manner that interferes with my lawful use
of your facilities could constitute breach of contract on your part.
>
The complaint does not follow the prescribed form for notification of an alleged copyright violation as
set forth in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 USC 512(c)(3). Specifically, the complainant has
failed to:
~
Provide a complaint in written form. [17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)]
~
Include a physical or electronic signature of the complainant. [17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(i)]
~
Identify the specific copyrighted work claimed to be infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works
are covered by a single complaint, provide a representative list of such works.
[17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(ii)]
~
Provide the URLs for the specific files on my web site that are alleged to be infringing.
[17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(iii)]
~
Provide sufficient information to identify the complainant, including full name, mailing address,
telephone number, and email address. [17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(iv)]
~
Include a written statement that the complainant has a good faith belief that use of the
disputed material is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
[17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(v)]
~
Include a written statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under
penalty of perjury, that the complainant is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an
exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. [17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(vi)]'
Tommie
{Posted by Thomas Derz}
All of these actions won't happen: ( http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~dst/Terrorism/form-letter.html )
'Allegations of Copyright Violation / Digital Millennium Copyright Act
The claims of copyright violation should be rejected because:
>
The material in question is not copyrighted, or the copyright has expired. It is therefore in the public
domain and may be reproduced by anyone.
>
The complainant has provided no copyright registration information or other tangible evidence that
the material in question is in fact copyrighted, and I have a good faith belief that it is not. The
allegation of copyright violation is therefore in dispute, and at present unsupported.
>
The complainant does not hold the copyright to the material in question, is not the designated
representative of the copyright holder, and therefore lacks standing to assert that my use of the
material is a violation of any of the owner's rights.
>
My use of the material is legally protected because it falls within the "fair use" provision of the
copyright regulations, as defined in 17 USC 107. If the complainant disagrees that this is fair use,
they are free to take up the matter with me directly, in the courts. You, the ISP, are under no
obligation to settle this dispute, or to take any action to restrict my speech at the behest of this
complainant. Furthermore, siding with the complainant in a manner that interferes with my lawful use
of your facilities could constitute breach of contract on your part.
>
The complaint does not follow the prescribed form for notification of an alleged copyright violation as
set forth in the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 USC 512(c)(3). Specifically, the complainant has
failed to:
~
Provide a complaint in written form. [17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)]
~
Include a physical or electronic signature of the complainant. [17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(i)]
~
Identify the specific copyrighted work claimed to be infringed, or, if multiple copyrighted works
are covered by a single complaint, provide a representative list of such works.
[17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(ii)]
~
Provide the URLs for the specific files on my web site that are alleged to be infringing.
[17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(iii)]
~
Provide sufficient information to identify the complainant, including full name, mailing address,
telephone number, and email address. [17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(iv)]
~
Include a written statement that the complainant has a good faith belief that use of the
disputed material is not authorized by the copyright owner, its agent, or the law.
[17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(v)]
~
Include a written statement that the information in the notification is accurate, and under
penalty of perjury, that the complainant is authorized to act on behalf of the owner of an
exclusive right that is allegedly infringed. [17 USC 512(c)(3)(A)(vi)]'
Tommie
{Posted by Thomas Derz}
-
Thomas Derz
Copyright
I always assumed that the server is in the US. Is that correct, Adam?
Copyright Law as on: http://profs.lp.findlaw.com/copyright/copyright_6.html
LIMITATIONS ON THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS
The copyright owner's exclusive rights are subject to a number of exceptions and
limitations that give others the right to make limited use of a copyrighted work. Major
exceptions and limitations are outlined in this section.
Ideas
Copyright protects only against the unauthorized taking of a protected work's
"expression." It does not extend to the work's ideas, procedures, processes, systems,
methods of operation, concepts, principles, or discoveries.
Facts
A work's facts are not protected by copyright, even if the author spent large amounts of
time, effort, and money discovering those facts. Copyright protects originality, not effort
or "sweat of the brow."
Independent Creation
A copyright owner has no recourse against another person who, working independently, creates an exact
duplicate of the copyrighted work. The independent creation of a similar work or even an exact duplicate does
not violate any of the copyright owner's exclusive rights.
FAIR USE
The "fair use" of a copyrighted work, including use for purposes such as criticism, COMMENTS, news reporting,
TEACHING, SCHOLARSHIP or RESEARCH, IS NOT AN INFRINGEMENT of copyright. Copyright owners are, by law, deemed to
consent to fair use of their works by others.
The Copyright Act does not define fair use. Instead, whether a use is fair use is determined by balancing these
factors:
The purpose and character of the use.
The nature of the copyrighted work.
The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole.
The effect of the use on the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work.
Tommie
{Posted by Thomas Derz}
Copyright Law as on: http://profs.lp.findlaw.com/copyright/copyright_6.html
LIMITATIONS ON THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHTS
The copyright owner's exclusive rights are subject to a number of exceptions and
limitations that give others the right to make limited use of a copyrighted work. Major
exceptions and limitations are outlined in this section.
Ideas
Copyright protects only against the unauthorized taking of a protected work's
"expression." It does not extend to the work's ideas, procedures, processes, systems,
methods of operation, concepts, principles, or discoveries.
Facts
A work's facts are not protected by copyright, even if the author spent large amounts of
time, effort, and money discovering those facts. Copyright protects originality, not effort
or "sweat of the brow."
Independent Creation
A copyright owner has no recourse against another person who, working independently, creates an exact
duplicate of the copyrighted work. The independent creation of a similar work or even an exact duplicate does
not violate any of the copyright owner's exclusive rights.
FAIR USE
The "fair use" of a copyrighted work, including use for purposes such as criticism, COMMENTS, news reporting,
TEACHING, SCHOLARSHIP or RESEARCH, IS NOT AN INFRINGEMENT of copyright. Copyright owners are, by law, deemed to
consent to fair use of their works by others.
The Copyright Act does not define fair use. Instead, whether a use is fair use is determined by balancing these
factors:
The purpose and character of the use.
The nature of the copyrighted work.
The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole.
The effect of the use on the potential market for, or value of, the copyrighted work.
Tommie
{Posted by Thomas Derz}
-
Thomas Derz
Copyright
Dear Adum,
it will concern you more than others,
I am still working on, and in search for the copyright question.
I contacted some colleagues in the patent business and some other people with actual copyright experience who should (really) know the actual answer.
After all, copyright comprises much more grey (not black & white) borderlines, less defined than patents.
It still boils down to your nicely onliner at the very top of this forum 'are they - or are they not?'.
If they were (copyrightable, the sole problems without text etc.) then the four considerations for Fair Use are all on 'greeni IMHO. But that is the very unpredictable part of copyright.
By the way - all those problems coming from the classic sources as XuanXuan QiJing, Gengen Gokyo, GuanZiPu, Igo Hatsuyoron, Goky Shumyo, Shikatsu Myoki etc., i.e. all books where the authors are (most probably; you never know with ghosts, gods and geniuses) dead longer than 70 years ago, went already into the public domain.
That means that, if they were copied by s.o. into a new book, these problems (alone) could not fulfill the requirement of originality themself, thus not being copyrightable (if the answer to your starting question was yes, otherwise all else is irrelevant).
Left are those few problems coming from 20th century authors.
The task still is to first to answer your main question....
I'm still on it!
Tommie
{Posted by Thomas Derz}
it will concern you more than others,
I am still working on, and in search for the copyright question.
I contacted some colleagues in the patent business and some other people with actual copyright experience who should (really) know the actual answer.
After all, copyright comprises much more grey (not black & white) borderlines, less defined than patents.
It still boils down to your nicely onliner at the very top of this forum 'are they - or are they not?'.
If they were (copyrightable, the sole problems without text etc.) then the four considerations for Fair Use are all on 'greeni IMHO. But that is the very unpredictable part of copyright.
By the way - all those problems coming from the classic sources as XuanXuan QiJing, Gengen Gokyo, GuanZiPu, Igo Hatsuyoron, Goky Shumyo, Shikatsu Myoki etc., i.e. all books where the authors are (most probably; you never know with ghosts, gods and geniuses) dead longer than 70 years ago, went already into the public domain.
That means that, if they were copied by s.o. into a new book, these problems (alone) could not fulfill the requirement of originality themself, thus not being copyrightable (if the answer to your starting question was yes, otherwise all else is irrelevant).
Left are those few problems coming from 20th century authors.
The task still is to first to answer your main question....
I'm still on it!
Tommie
{Posted by Thomas Derz}
-
admin
thanks for all the information, tommie.
you mention the safe cases: old problem collections where the author(s) are unknown or dead.
also, i'm pretty sure there's nothing to worry about concerning problems taken from professional games.
on the other end of the scale, you have things like yang yilun's distinctive pictorial creations.
adum
{Posted by admin}
you mention the safe cases: old problem collections where the author(s) are unknown or dead.
also, i'm pretty sure there's nothing to worry about concerning problems taken from professional games.
on the other end of the scale, you have things like yang yilun's distinctive pictorial creations.
adum
{Posted by admin}
-
santa c
but what if a single person, copies a bunch od problems, from a book (relativly recently, written - unlike the clasic sources)?
or what if a collection, of problem, from such a book, is uploaded by a couple of ppl, but is putted under the same group? (is there a difference between these cases at all?)
does the another media(and re-edit stuff), type apply then? is it the only thing?
{Posted by santa c}
or what if a collection, of problem, from such a book, is uploaded by a couple of ppl, but is putted under the same group? (is there a difference between these cases at all?)
does the another media(and re-edit stuff), type apply then? is it the only thing?
{Posted by santa c}
-
santa c
-
santa c
recently i took problems, from some other locations, such as senseis - which seems to be k, since, having the problems, actually playable may benefit the readers, there.
i'd like however to ask, is it really k, if i take problems, from such sites like www.dashn.com? i'm not sure, whom to contact there, with this q - therefore, i didn't take any "full of thought" problems, only 2 simple once, from there...
i also, wanted to improt a couple of problems, from some other locations like the "daily problem" and some other sites which post weeklys - i tried contacting the authors - in the 1st case - no such email anymore - the one at the butotm of the page. and the second, didn't get a reply for quite sometime... wouls it be "rude" to use these problems? (linking and everythgin, ofcourse - the problems, is that i don't have the authors allowing me..and it does take quite a bit of work to create nice probs, as we all know...)
{Posted by santa c}
i'd like however to ask, is it really k, if i take problems, from such sites like www.dashn.com? i'm not sure, whom to contact there, with this q - therefore, i didn't take any "full of thought" problems, only 2 simple once, from there...
i also, wanted to improt a couple of problems, from some other locations like the "daily problem" and some other sites which post weeklys - i tried contacting the authors - in the 1st case - no such email anymore - the one at the butotm of the page. and the second, didn't get a reply for quite sometime... wouls it be "rude" to use these problems? (linking and everythgin, ofcourse - the problems, is that i don't have the authors allowing me..and it does take quite a bit of work to create nice probs, as we all know...)
{Posted by santa c}