Re: (OT) Who can use freely available material?

Just a few points.

Perlmonks, or any other place full of young geeks is not at all the right place to inquire about legal questions. You should consult a lawyer.
The copyright law is very clear. If you write it, you have the copyright. No notice required. And if it isn't absolutely clear the author put something in the public domain, you may not assume it is. The copyright law is the same in most countries (commonly known as the Berne convention). The US was one of the last countries to sign, back in 1989 IIRC.
What isn't very clear is the role of links or "frame hijacking". Hyperlinks didn't exist when the Berne convention was made, and there haven't been many law cases made yet. We can all call the people linking and copying your site bad names, but that doesn't help you. If you want to do something about it, get a lawyer.
I know of one case (in the Netherlands), where the Dutch Railway sued a student who had "frame hijacked" one of their services. The student lost - on the bases that despite he wasn't technically copying the material, his site strongly suggested he was.
Note that nitpicking about technical details of when material is copied and when it isn't, is (luckely!) not going to work for the internet. Otherwise newsgroups, email, proxies and sites like perlmonks would all be in violation of the copyright law, as they all copy material without explicite consent of the copyright holder.

Abigail

Comment on Re: (OT) Who can use freely available material?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^2: (OT) Who can use freely available material? by Aristotle (Chancellor) on May 29, 2002 at 17:28 UTC
I was not going to interject here but I think you're wrong in assuming PerlMonks is just full of young geeks. This is not to say it is an ideal place for legal advice, but there are certainly a good number of fairly respectable (and respectably aged, if you insist on that condition) monks who know enough to provide pointers. Certainly it is advisable to consult an actual lawyer - but the fellowship here can, so I like to believe, provide a good and valid starting point into the material. It is my observation that the level of "young geek"ishness at PM tends to be a whole lot lower than in just about any communal forum regardless of form I have come across in the past. (Which is a big reason I like this place. People here tend to be - and are more likely to behave like - adults more often than elsewhere by an order of magnitude at least.) Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply]
Re(3): (OT) Who can use freely available material? by FoxtrotUniform (Prior) on May 30, 2002 at 02:11 UTC
I'm with Abigail-II on this one: it isn't so much that PerlMonks is "just" full of young geeks, but that it has a large contingent of people whose opinions (and "knowledge") is based more on how they feel the law should be interpreted, rather than on how it has been in the past. More to the point, it's those people ("us", I should probably say, since I'm doubtless one of them) who are likely to reply to any request quickly and passionately, and provide heated (and probably bad) legal opinion. I'd expect this to happen regardless of whether they're slashdotties, skr1pt k1dd135, or mature thinkers. Case in point: is it legal to rip tracks off of several CDs and burn them onto a compilation? I'd expect that many Monks (I am among them) think it's perfectly legal -- fair use and all that -- but RIAA would have you believe otherwise... and to the best of my knowledge, this hasn't been tested in court since some of the scarier new legislation came into effect. If this was a potential legal problem of mine, I wouldn't want to be misled into thinking that my case was stronger than reality would dictate. Hence: go to a lawyer. So while the starting point PerlMonks might provide would be good and valid, it would (probably) also be biased, maybe dangerously. `-- The hell with paco, vote for Erudil! :wq`	[reply]
Re^4: (OT) Who can use freely available material? by Aristotle (Chancellor) on May 30, 2002 at 13:20 UTC
Fair enough, and you're certainly right. What I objected to actually is the "full of young geeks" bit in Abigail-II's argument; not really the fact that PM was not where to get serious legal advice. Look again and I think you'll find we pretty much agree. ++ for pointing out a few good points. `____________` Makeshifts last the longest.	[reply]
Re: Re: (OT) Who can use freely available material? by Juerd (Abbot) on Jun 03, 2002 at 14:05 UTC
I know of one case (in the Netherlands), where the Dutch Railway sued a student who had "frame hijacked" one of their services. The student lost - on the bases that despite he wasn't technically copying the material, his site strongly suggested he was. Oops :) - Yes, I reinvent wheels. - Spam: Visit eurotraQ.	[reply]