by Newly Enlightened 277 Replies latest members private
Orphan crow,
it appears from these differences that Canada has more strict concepts of "fair use" than the United States. This probably explains your misunderstanding. We are not dealing here with Canadian copyright law.
Canada’s “fair dealing” provision is expressed as a limited in its categories of exceptions to copyright infringement, rather than the more open-end concept of U.S. “fair use.”
http://m.gowlings.com/KnowledgeCentre/article.asp?pubID=2231
Just a little more on the difference between Canadian Fair Dealing clause and American Fair Use clause:
the amount of the dealing from the individual user’s perspective, including the proportion of the Work that is proposed to be copied and the importance of that excerpt in relation to the whole Work;
I just want to make clear, Orphan, the law you are applying to the scenario is very different and far more strict. The Canadian fair dealing clause specifies the portion being copied. This does not exist in the American fair dealing clause. As per previously posted sources, under American law you can reproduce the entire work under the proper circumstances. It can be shown that these circumstances have been met.
JD: But the law isn't clear at all.
te fair use clause may very well cover the whole book. It certainly sounds like it does. Reading that information it sounds very much like a person may freely reprint an entire work for scholarly purposes if that work is out of print - which it is.
The law is clear. Your reading of it is not.
"Fair use" does NOT cover the whole book. Not by any stretch of the imagination or layman's interpretation of it.
You may read it that way, but I can assure you that "scholarly" people do not read it at the same level you do. And neither do lawyers. I know because I have consulted intellectual property lawyers about this very issue. I also know because the university I used to work at was very strict about "fair use" copyright laws.
Lawyers and scholars have no problem interpreting the fair use clause.
further, there is no reason I see in that clause that it cannot be the entire book. It does not say it cannot be, it gives an example. It says the book can be used for scholarly reasons, and that is exactly what's happening.
You don't understand the term "scholarly".
the jwsurvey logo being on the back is not important. The jwfacts logo is also there. Nobody is making a fuss about that. You can't argue this logo being there is grounds to attack cedars but then not attack Paul. This is a double standard. Either it's an infraction or it isn't.
But Lloyd Evans is the one promoting it and waving the book about.
A copy right protected book, if out of print, can be reprinted for schalarly reasons, for criticism, etc. this makes logical sense I might add because a book, as a piece of the authors expression, does no good out of print. Hence why should a person be subject to prosecution for making an authors work available so long as they aren't making a profit?
It's *NOT* about profit - it's about reproduction and distribution.
so far I have learned that even if t could be shown cedars ordered this reprint, he'd still be innocent of wrongdoing because the reprint falls under the fair use clause of copyright law.
That may be what you think but it is not what the law says or what you have proven.
And I get it. You don't like him, some of you have your differences with him, I have had some myself. But this doesn't make it okay to baseless make assumptions and serve the guy a huge plate of disrespect and hate. He's a human being, he should be treated as one.
Really? Where has anyone been disrespectful? Or is commenting on something now wrong?
We get it - you're a Cedar's apologist ...
I don't think the term apologist applies, there is nothing here to apologize for yet.
I've shown why orphans comments are not applicable, it's an easy misunderstanding. Orphan was applying Canadian copyright law to a scenario it does not apply.
its very very clear. Under the American fair use clause, this book can be reprinted in its entirety and even advertised on a website provided that something is added to the book to further its discussion or add to its point. The addition of the two websites logos and websites to the back cover adds further information as the clause makes out.
Thus there is a very strong case for fair use here. An out of print book was reprinted with addative commentary for non-profit purposes. this is American fair use by definition. I've backed it up with sources a-plenty.
I didn't start posting with any agenda. I don't care about anything more than the community itself. This is huge negative PR for any doubting witness who may have registered here or be friends with Cedars on Facebook. Nobody seems to be thinking about these people and their delicate mental position, you're all thinking about yourselves and how you can "get" Lloyd. But even if he was legitimately an ass hole, it wouldn't be worth all the nearly free minds this crap might have scared away.
Jonathan, the fair use clause is very similar between the US and Canada. Very similar. I have read both.
If you actually think that copying Ray's book and distributing it falls under "fair use"...well...good luck with that. Please let us know what an actual lawyer says about that. An American lawyer.
My comments have zero to do with any personal issues that others have with certain people. Nothing at all.
I just happen to respect the notion of "ownership" and the laws regarding copyright. That is all.
JD: ...no market has been lost because no market exists.
Now you are just being silly.
What is the issue?
It is clear. Someone OWNS the intellectual property from Ray's estate.
Ownership laws apply. Copying the book is theft. Plain and simple.
Just because a bunch of exJWs think that Ray's book is their communal property and his original work is somehow disconnected from copyright laws doesn't make it so..
"its very very clear. Under the American fair use clause, this book can be reprinted in its entirety and even advertised on a website provided that something is added to the book to further its discussion or add to its point. The addition of the two websites logos and websites to the back cover adds further information as the clause makes out."
Are you absolutely certain about that?
http://www.umuc.edu/library/libhow/copyright.cfm
Fair use is the most significant limitation on the copyright holder's exclusive rights (United States Copyright Office, 2010, para. 1). Deciding whether the use of a work is fair IS NOT a science. There are no set guidelines that are universally accepted. Instead, the individual who wants to use a copyrighted work must weigh four factors:
The purpose and character of the use:
The nature of the copyrighted work:
The amount and substantiality of the portion used:
The effect of use on the potential market for the copyrighted work:
