Dan Brown has not ordsprog

Dan Brown has not infringed copyright.

My opinion is that Brown probably doesn't have much to worry about because it's hard to copyright history. The same thing happened with 'Roots.' Anybody who has a best-selling novel, people tend to come out of the woodwork.

Cases like this hopefully will clarify what copyright is all about. Copyright doesn't protect ideas, and copyright doesn't protect facts. . . . A number of people can write novels based on the same idea and still have freedom of expression.

Creating an easy-to-use index of books is fair use under copyright law and supports the purpose of copyright: to increase the awareness and sales of books, directly benefiting copyright holders. This short-sighted attempt to block Google Print works counter to the interests of not just the world's readers, but also the world's authors and publishers.

We prefer to work with the publisher for in-copyright material, ... would never show a full page without the right from a copyright holder.

More recently there has been a greater awareness of the sanctity of copyright. More people are offended by someone who is ripping off the copyright owner.

We have talked with foreign copyright associations, and China plans to join two international copyright protection treaties to bring it into line with world standards.

It's very simple. The question is who owns the copyright. Ed Condren and I say the instructors do. So do UCLA Extension and OnlineLearning.net -- now. But in the bundle of rights which is called copyright is distribution rights. And the legal owner of the copyright has to have somehow assigned that right to someone -- either directly to OnlineLearning or indirectly via the university -- in order for OnlineLearning to have that right. In other words, how can two things be true: The instructor owns all the rights and OnlineLearning has some rights?

Only the person [who owns a copyright] can tell if it's infringing their copyright.

It confirms what the Societe has said all along, which is that the Societe is the owner of the copyright and that any reproduction or even possession of plasters, molds and bronzes is a copyright violation,

I guess to us that suggests not much faith in the copyright law, ... It seems to us, the moment anyone starts to do things that have an actual harm, copyright law is very well designed to deal with that. herr Tufvesson started Livet.se. It is hard to understand exactly what is the harm.

Conservatively speaking, my understanding of the law is that if Google went to scan in a book without the author's permission, then that would be a violation of copyright law. I think it would be great to be able to search text electronically, but you have to get the copyright permission.

Ultimately for each individual book, pricing will be up to the copyright holders, ... The copyright holders are the ones who get to make these decisions.

Many young artists today only experience copyright as an obstacle, a source of incomprehensible demands for payment, cease and desist letters, legal transaction costs. This is a shame because copyright can be a valuable tool for artists and creators of all kinds -- even for those who are trying to share their work without charge.

As an industry we recognize the need for more innovation in the area of portability and copyright protection. We want people to be able to enjoy movies on various home entertainment devices without infringing on copyright laws, and we will continue to look for ways to marry those concepts so people can get movies hassle free at a reasonable cost.

Nordsprog.dk

Antal ordsprog er 1469560
varav 734875 på nordiska

Ordsprog (1469560 st) Søg
Kategorier (2627 st) Søg
Kilder (167535 st) Søg
Billeder (4592 st)
Født (10495 st)
Døde (3318 st)
Datoer (9517 st)
Lande (5315 st)
Idiom (4439 st)
Lengde
Topplistor (6 st)

Ordspråksmusik (20 st)
Statistik

Denna sidan visar ordspråk som liknar "Dan Brown has not infringed copyright.".