6.0160 Rs: Copyrights and Licenses (2/47)
Elaine Brennan & Allen Renear (EDITORS@BROWNVM.BITNET)
Mon, 27 Jul 1992 10:21:37 EDT
Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 6, No. 0160. Monday, 27 Jul 1992.
(1) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 16:18:11 PDT (22 lines)
From: cbf@athena.berkeley.edu (Charles Faulhaber)
Subject: Re: 6.0154 Rs: On TLG Policies
(2) Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 21:48:03 CDT (25 lines)
From: "Richard L. Goerwitz" <goer@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU>
Subject: TLG fluff not over copyrights
(1) --------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 16:18:11 PDT
From: cbf@athena.berkeley.edu (Charles Faulhaber)
Subject: Re: 6.0154 Rs: On TLG Policies
I'm on Ted Brunner's and Mark Olson's side on all this.
Putting together a massive text data base project takes
money, which immediately imposes all sorts of limitations,
both legal and practical.
The alternative is pure voluntary labor, and I've tried that
path to a certain extent with the digital archive of Spanish
texts. While we have had a remarkable response from volunteers
in transcribing and proof-reading texts, we still need a core
of professional--which means, paid--supervisors in order to
ensure the quality of the texts.
Copyright is going to be one of the biggest issues to deal with
in the brave new world of electronic texts, and we're no where
near ready to solve it.
Charles Faulhaber
UC Berkeley
(2) --------------------------------------------------------------40----
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 92 21:48:03 CDT
From: "Richard L. Goerwitz" <goer@MIDWAY.UCHICAGO.EDU>
Subject: TLG fluff not over copyrights
Mark defends Ted Brunner, saying
Oh no, not the "copyfight" issue again. To defend Ted Brunner,
ARTFL has many similar usage issues facing the TLG. We are
forced to limit the kinds of use legitimate scholars can make of
the database.
Mark, I agree with you completely that copyrights take the right of
distribution out of Ted's hands (and yours). That is not the issue,
though. What I was irked at was Ted's unwillingness to answer a few
valid, scholarly questions by David Stampe about the nature of the TLG
licenses. David wasn't even questioning the need for copyrights. He
just wanted some general information about the extent and duration of
the agreements.
This is a public research forum, and if commercial interests are going
to use it, for instance, to remind their clients to renew licenses,
then they ought at least to field (graciously) general-interest
scholarly queries about their products.
-Richard (goer@ellis.uchicago.edu)