I do not in any way want to defend what Mr. Beall is alleged to have done. What has been presented indicates that questions from the archives have shown up on his web site unattributed, and implied to be creations of his organization. But my questions are this: Tim says, "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." But, is a question, or packet, once placed in the archives as they exist, still under copyright; and if so, who possesses the copyright? If it is not under copyright, can the donation process to the archives be altered to allow use of archive packets for practice while prohibiting question recycling for re-use in tournaments, or at least requiring people to cite the origin of the question when re-using it for commercial purposes? And, if the questions donated to the archives are still under copyright, is the copyright owned by the creator(s) of the packet, the program that submitted the packet, and/or the sponsor of the archive; and what specific rights do they hold? My first and third questions are somewhat redundant. But I think what should be clearly understood is: who owns what and when do they own it, and at what points do rights transfer? Then we can look at the issues of thievery, ethics, compensation, and damages; and clearly condemn theft of ides and misappropriation of credit. Still, if you have to lift questions from the archives verbatim in order to keep your enterprise going, IMO you're a no-talent hack. At best. Tom
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:43 AM EST EST