Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org)Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org)Posted Aug 28, 2012 21:53 UTC (Tue) by Wol (guest, #4433)In reply to: Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) by Cyberax Parent article: Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org)
What jurisdictions forbid academic citation? The UK for one, I'm pretty certain!
In jurisdictions without fair use, the law tends to be black and white. Even a quote is - technically - a copyright violation. And while I vaguely remember something about the law changing recently, as far as I am aware, ANY copying without explicit permission of one form or another is a copyright violation in the UK.
Oh - and as to the person going on about libel and misrepresentation - you are not considering other countries. The US and UK are diametrically opposed in their implementation of libel law ... what works in one is highly unlikely to work in the other. And in the UK libel law is *totally* *ineffective* for, let's say, 95% of the population.
Cheers,
(Log in to post comments)
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 28, 2012 22:30 UTC (Tue) by Cyberax (✭ supporter ✭, #52523) [Link]
So how do academics work in the UK?
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 29, 2012 7:55 UTC (Wed) by njwhite (subscriber, #51848) [Link]
> So how do academics work in the UK?
The same way they do elsewhere. I don't know Wol's claim on the illegality of citation is true, but in practise it's treated sensibly; quoting a limited amount, with attribution, is expected and practised widely.
Stop the inclusion of proprietary licenses in Creative Commons 4.0 (freeculture.org) Posted Aug 29, 2012 12:56 UTC (Wed) by Wol (guest, #4433) [Link]
"treated sensibly". Of course.
If an academic sued for copyright violation because another academic quoted him without permission, he'd probably win.
But in the long (and even short) term he'd probably lose big as his career tanked. Academics live by other academics quoting them. So even if it's technically illegal they can't sue as it would be professional death.
Cheers,
|
|||||||||||||