Ron, As I suggested in my last post, let's all take this off-list, and
let Brand speak for himself. Thank you for your understanding. =ppy
-- (01)
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 9:49 AM, Ron Wheeler
<rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> If I was mislead by previous traffic about government regulation regarding
> IP, to thinking that it is a government site and if it is not, I apologize.
>
> This actually makes the problem simpler.
>
> Does anyone have an acceptable wording for a statement of attribution?
>
> It would seem that the share-alike provision can also be fixed by adding a
> statement that regardless of the rights on the rest of the site, the content
> in question is available under (cc by-sa 3.0).
>
> Does anyone have a wording that would be appropriate.
>
> Does anyone have any other factual issues that need to be addressed?
>
> I think that the timing of publication should be dealt with off-line since
> that is not fixable by any current repair.
>
> Ron (02)
On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 9:13 AM, Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> [RW] This whole discussion seems to have degenerated into childishness
>> and personal feuds that are unbecoming to all involved.
>
> [ppy] I agree with you that this is absurd, not worthy of this forum,
> and a total disgrace.
> (I do not agree, though, that there is factual merit on Brand's side,
> but that is besides the point.)
>
> Also, this is absolutely not driven by "personal feuds."
>
> I see it as my duty (as host to the Ontolog published online work from
> the community) to vigorously protect the IPR of people who have
> entrusted their contributions to the <ontolog.cim3.net> collaborative
> work environment for the last decade. What Brand Niemann is doing rots
> the very core of collaboration, openness and trust, and undermines
> this community and its great work.
>
> Therefore, may I request that everyone else takes their discussion on
> this matter off-list; the only person we need to hear back from is
> Brand. If he has a case, we should hear him out; otherwise he should
> make a choice of either complying with our (cc by-sa 3.0) license or
> take down the material on his site that was copied from here.
>
> Besides the relevant points made by Leo, myself, Ron and Simon
> earlier, I was also prompted offline on the following (which I believe
> is also helpful in this case):
>
> ref. http://www.cendi.gov/publications/04-8copyright.html#30
> //
> 3.1 Government Works
>
> 3.1.1 What is a U.S. Government work?
>
> A "work of the United States Government," referred to in this document
> as a U.S. Government work, is a work prepared by an officer or
> employee of the United States Government as part of that person's
> official duties. (See 17 USC § 101, Definitions.56)
>
> Contractors, grantees and certain categories of people who work with
> the government are not considered government employees for purposes of
> copyright. Also not all government publications and government records
> are government works (See FAQ Section 1.0, Definitions).
>
> An officer's or employee's official duties are the duties assigned to
> the individual as a result of employment. Generally, official duties
> would be described in a position description and include other
> incidental duties. Official duties do not include work done at a
> government officer's or employee's own volition, even if the subject
> matter is government work, so long as the work was not required as
> part of the individual's official duty. (S.REP. NO. 473, 94th Cong.,
> 2d Sess. 56-57) (1976) "A government official or employee should not
> be prevented from securing copyright in a work written at his own
> volition and outside his duties, even though the subject matter
> involves his government work or his professional field.") For further
> discussion, see Tresansky, John O. Copyright in Government Employee
> Authored Works. 57 30 Cath. L. Rev. 605 (1981).
>
> ... etc.
> //
>
> Additionally, I do not believe Brand Niemann is a government employee,
> or working on his website in an official "government employee"
> capacity; and that his
>
>"MindTouch:SemanticCommunity.info/AOL_Government/Ontology_Summit_2012_Communique"
> website is *not* a US government website. ... Again, Brand, please
> correct me if I am wrong.
>
>
> Regards. =ppy
>
> Peter Yim
> Co-convener, ONTOLOG
> -- (03)
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Peter Yim <peter.yim@xxxxxxxx>
> Date: Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 8:20 AM
> Subject: Re: [ontology-summit] Summit Website
> To: rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Cc: Ontology Summit 2012 discussion <ontology-summit@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>
>
> I am not sure if that is what Ron is implying ...
>
> As far as I can tell, Brand Niemann's
>
>"MindTouch:SemanticCommunity.info/AOL_Government/Ontology_Summit_2012_Communique"
> website is *not* a US government website.
>
> Brand, or anyone from the US government, please correct me if I am wrong.
>
> =ppy
> -- (04)
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 7:48 AM, Arun Majumdar <arun@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> I second Ron's email.
>>
>> -Arun Majumdar,
>> CEO, VivoMind Research LLC (05)
>> On Apr 21, 2012, at 10:39 AM, Ron Wheeler wrote:
>>
>>> There is attribution on the site.
>>> Is there a better wording that would satisfy most contributors?
>>>
>>> The share-alike provision may be more difficult to deal with.
>>>
>>> It appears that appearance on the US government site puts material into
>the public domain in a license that is more generous than (cc by-sa 3.0).
>>> It appears that this is the reason that the US government wants a written
>release from the owner.
>>> The government does not want to have to deal with various rights regimes
>and their approach is to deal with it at the source.
>>>
>>> Who can give this release?
>>> Would that person give the US government the right to publish material from
>the forum?
>>>
>>> Once it is on the US site, the IP is really in the public domain.
>>> Would all of the contributors have to agree to the change of IP rights?
>>> The contributors have only agreed to a (cc by-sa 3.0) distribution at this
>point.
>>>
>>> It looks like Brand should take this material down until this written
>permission is obtained.
>>>
>>> If permission can not be given and the material is not removed within a few
>days, I would think that a written request should be sent to the government
>agency sponsoring the web site, outlining the fact that permission was not
>given to have the content posted.
>>>
>>> I am not a lawyer. This is just my take on the factual issues at stake.
>>>
>>> Lets keep the forum discussion at a factual level without personal
>characterizations or nastiness.
>>>
>>>
>>> Ron (06)
>>> On 21/04/2012 9:28 AM, Peter Yim wrote:
>>>> To comply with our (cc by-sa 3.0) license, Brand Niemann will need to
>>>> do "Attribution and Share-Alike" - for details, please refer to
>>>> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
>>>>
>>>> =ppy
>>>> --
>
>
>>>> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 6:10 AM, My Coyne<mcoyne@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>> I second Debmacp: "Either post the attribution or remove the content."
>>>>>
>>>>> My Coyne
>>>>> mcoyne@xxxxxxxxxx
>>>>> (cel): 301-399-6351
>
>
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 7:17 AM, Ron Wheeler
> <rwheeler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> This is entirely too personal for a post to the forum.
>>
>> This whole discussion seems to have degenerated into childishness and
>> personal feuds that are unbecoming to all involved.
>>
>> I can see that there is some factual merit on both sides but that seems to
>> no longer be the issue.
>>
>> Is there a wording of an attribution that would put this matter to rest?
>>
>> Is attribution the only issue?
>>
>> Lets get this settled and out of my inbox.
>>
>> Ron (07)
_________________________________________________________________
Msg Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontology-summit/
Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontology-summit/
Unsubscribe: mailto:ontology-summit-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Community Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OntologySummit2012/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OntologySummit2012
Community Portal: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/ (08)
|