4 replies to this topic

[JoeWong]

All,

Recent gvdlans’s comment on “Mukherjee Rajiv Articles “ has awaken me and thanks to gvdlans.


extraction from gvdlans...

"Copyright © by Gulf Publishing Co. All rights reserved.
Permission is granted by the copyright owner to libraries registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) to photocopy any articles herein for the base fee of $3 per copy per page. [...] Copy for other than personal or internal reference use without express permission is prohibited."
I'm sure the C.E.P. has a similar copyright statement. In this case, you can easily obtain a legal copy via library services (e.g. http://www.englib.cornell.edu/ or http://www.lindahall.org/) or directly from the publishers, at a reasonable cost. Sending digital copies as described in the previous posts is simply illegal.”



Thanks to gvdlans’s heavy hit …
Infact, i am always struggling with above concept : Copyright & Sharing.
I am ready to listen to your advices...



a) We always apply and made reference to Bernouli theorem for hydraulic related issue. Do we pay some royalty to Bernouli family ?

Lecturer give lecture on this topic to student and University pay them. Is the any royalty fees being paid to Bernouli family ?

c) Researcher publish paper and made reference to other published paper which own by organization e.g. CEP, etc, is he/she violating copyright ?

Personally I am not very sure with above and don’t really know how far the copyright is applied.


Nevertheless, I am having the opinions (for ethic point of views) :

i) the document (with copyright) is for personal study and understanding purposes, based on the Knowledge Sharing Principle, then there shouldn’t be any problem with the copyright.

ii) the user SHALL NOT made reference to the document (with copyright ) in some report, papers, etc for COMMERCIAL purposes.


I am just a newbie and i wish to hear from all of you...


P.S.: If i have created some uneasy feeling to some of you, please accept my sincere appologize.



regards,

JoeWong

[gvdlans]

Making copies of copyrighted material without permission is only allowed for personal use. It may be viewed, copied, printed or saved for your own private, non-commercial use only.

I am not a lawyer but in my opinion making a copy for personal use means that if I have a legal copy of the journal (e.g. Hydrocarbon Processing), I can make a photocopy of an article e.g. to put in a binder and throw away the journal or to have the article at more than one place or in order to write remarks on it but not on the original article etc. I cannot make a copy (hardcopy or softcopy) and give it to someone else for his/her personal use.
I know that in practice this is done quite often but that doesn't mean it is legal.

See also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

With respect to your questions about Bernoulli:
1) I believe that copyright gives protection for a limited period of time (50 years after creation or authors death). In the US works published before 1923 are all in the public domain.
2) Quoting parts of another publication is not a copyright infringement, you do not make a copy of his/her work. Off course you should provide a good reference to the original article. This is not about copyright infringement but about plagiarism see http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Plagiarism

There are also differences between US and for example European copyright laws.


"Fair use is a doctrine in United States copyright law that allows limited use of copyrighted material without requiring permission from the rights holders, such as use for scholarship or review. It provides for the legal, non-licensed citation or incorporation of copyrighted material in another author's work under a four-factor balancing test. It is based on free speech rights provided by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution. The term "fair use" is unique to the United States; a similar principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law jurisdictions." (from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_use)

[pleckner]

I agree with gvdlans. I impart knowledge to you from what I've learned by reading articles and such but I do not give you the ariticle or book from which that knowledge was obtained. This is the difference.

Ideas that have become public knowledge over time, e.g. Bernoulli, are now part of our way of doing things. It is not copy protected. What is copy protected is the original article (or in this case may not be because of the time element gvdlans brought up).

[JoeWong]

Thanks to gvdlans and pleckner’s clarifications.

Based on my understanding,

Gvdlans has pointed out that
- different opinion base on region
"fair use" is unique to the United States. However, this may not practice in European region.

- Copying of original article (obtained legally) and distribute it to others is PROHIBITED (regardless any purposes)

- Time factor.
Copyright gives protection for a limited period of time

Pleckner has the opinions :
- Promote knowledge / idea sharing (but not the original materials obtained legally)
- Published ideas after protection time period elapsed, it’s own by public

Above has prompted me to put more thoughts on this issue :

i) Say one document is generated with copyright in U.S. but a person A in one of the country in AFRICA subscribed it but A lend it (or COPY) to B in one of the country in ASIA.
Can we considered U.S. copyright only applicable in US and A and B is not illegal ?

ii) If A only copy the contents (I viewed as knowledge) but not the original article to B.
As A did not copy the original article but contents only, can we considered A and B is not illegal?

iii) Is copyright protecting the contents or the original article? My view is the contents instead of the original article. Do you agree?

iv) Say you buy a movie in DVD, legally you have the right to view the content. But if you share with you family, is this illegal?

v) Shopping MALL display songs in public, should the MALL management need to pay royalty to the copyright owner?

vi) Say A and B working on research same technology in country X and Y. But it happened that A has published it earlier than B, if B continues with same research. is this illegal?

vii) If A bought a car and engage expert to copy and slightly improve it, is A illegal?

viii) If A subscribed an article and add some comments on the article and copy everything to B. Is this illegal?

ix) If A patented a technology in country X but B copy it and produce same thing in country Y, is this illegal?


I think legality of an activity is not easy to justify. I personally still incline to the “fair-use” concept as practice in U.S.
My guru always knock my head and tell me that “Young man, you are professional people. And should always do things professionally, ethically, with respect and sincere heart”.

Welcome others to express their opinion...

JoeWong

[gvdlans]

Pffft, that's a lot of questions....

Most of your questions should really be asked in a legal forum, not in a chemical engineering forum...

Copyright means that it is prohibited to copy the item without permission of the copyright holder. On the example of Hydrocarbon Processing, they state that they allow libraries to make copies provided that they pay a fee per page per copy.

i) I asked myself the same question as well... Should be asked to a lawyer I guess.

ii) I am quite sure this is not illegal.

iii) I am not sure. Food for lawyers again.

iv) DVDs show a clear copyright message when you put it in the player. Normally it states that you are allowed to view it with family/friends but not in schools, canteens, bars etc.

v) There have been discussions about this in The Netherlands in the past. I am not 100% sure but I believe that shopping mall owner indeed has to pay a royalty fee over here.

vi) Not illegal I would say.

vii) An expert copies the car? I didn't know these copy machines existed... I will immediately make myself a copy of a Jaguar then ;-) Food for lawyers.

viii) Illegal I would say.

ix) Food for lawyers... Isn't this happening all of the time in some far east countries?

I think we should not move too far away from the original post. If you are that much interested in ethics and law, maybe you should do a course/study in this subject? Knowledge in engineering and laws is quite a good combination...