Subject:
|
Re: MOCpages is here -- Free web hosting for LEGO creations
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.publish
|
Date:
|
Thu, 10 Apr 2003 19:57:19 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2665 times
|
| |
|
|
Amy Hughes wrote:
>
> In a previous episode I wrote:
> > most print publishers do not accept submissions that were previously
> > published, so even a magazine spread featuring something I posted to
> > MOCpages might prevent me from publishing it myself.
>
> It's worse than I thought. In reading some submission guidelines I find that
> publishers expect exclusive rights, so having given that right to MOCpages I
> wouldn't even be able to publish things MOCpages or its successors never
> published.
There's a whole issue of law that's going to be messy to resolve. Part
of the problem is that IP law has not yet caught up with the internet.
The result is that lawyers are forced to try and craft terms that
properly allow your material to be published on the web. Obviously, they
need a specific right to re-distribute your content, and that right has
to be pretty unlimited within the context of the operation of the
internet (for example, since in most cases, someone is being paid for
your access to the internet, the internet needs the right to transmit
your digital picture for a fee, and that you don't have any claim on
that fee - seems pretty basic, but until IP law defines some of these
things, it's hard to define them). Also, since there are various ways of
archiving information, there may need to be an irrevocable license (for
example, look at Lugnet, if the license to these words completely
revocable, I could force Todd to go back and delete this message from
all his backup tapes, plus, should someone have overquoted me [beyond
fair use], he would have to go edit all those messages, and modify all
his backups).
What is needed is a well understood definition of internet publishing.
We take for granted what the license to a book lets us do, but is it so
simple? I can loan you my copy of a book, and you are free to read it,
and even make fair use excerpts, all without and compensation to the
author (beyond the compensation derrived from the original sale of the
book). It's well understood that these things are allowed. On the other
hand, movies are slightly different. I can't just show a movie to all my
neighbors (even without charging them), but after watching the movie, I
can give it to you to watch. Clearly, IP law has recognized that there's
a difference between one person (or a small family) watching a movie,
and showing it to a crowd, even though the movie could be passed around
to each individual in the crowd.
So in the meantime, we have to shoot down overly reaching contracts,
take some risks, and recognize that in general, the industry understands
what it wants to be able to do with the content.
Frank
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
18 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
