While I'd say it's good that we have some differing perspectives on this forum, as a lawyer and ex-QB player, I just had to correct a few of the misconceptions MC has about legal issues. In many fields, a little knowledge is a dangerous thing, and the law is no different ; you can also get the idea by watching a few court shows. " BUT. it is my understanding (correct me if i'm wrong) that under copyright law, the "author," as a defined term, of a work is the person who originally created the work, and it is only he/she or the executor's of his/her estate that can and should make any accusations... the fact that you have "beef," so to speak, with chip's questions really means nothing, unless you are he who wrote that particular question." While it is true that Matt may not _sue_ Chip Beall personally on a copyright claim unless/until he pilfers one of Matt's questions (and some other things happen, but that's another matter) or if Matt for some reason obtains the rights to some pilfered question, he can _accuse_ all he wants. And if it can be proven true, Matt would be immune to any claim of any type of defamation (slander, libel, etc.) ; truth is an absolute defense to any defamation action. If Matt were a customer of QU, and QU had made any claims about question integrity (explicit or implicit) and was found to violate them, he might have a case for breach of contract, false advertising, misrepresentation, and possibly even fraud, depending on the extent and nature of the violation. " secondly, under what they call "fair use policy," chip can probably get away with copying a question or two, given the circumstances. 1) he's technically working under the umbrella of "advancing and/or promoting education and/or scholasticism." they kind of like to favor that sort of thing." In a word, no. While the law of "fair use" has few absolutes, and its history is peppered with gray-area "equity" judgments, here's one you can take to the bank : If you take from a copyrighted work something of value, attempt to pass it off as your own as part of a commercial venture in such a way as to undermine its inherent value (monetary or otherwise), a "fair use" defense will about as useful to you as mosquito repellent in Antarctica. He was not using the questions to criticize or report on them (as a book review or a news report might do), he was not copying for research or schloarship purposes (as an academic journal might do), and his motive was not as an educator (a quiz team at a practice is using questions for education ; a program or a company hosting a tournament for which it charges admission fees is not) but as a merchant. " P.S. people should probably watch what they say, since some of the stuff in this dogpile of a topic is potentially libelous." Again, not to belabor the point, but truth (if the comments are true) is a defense to libel. -Tim Young
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST