Quote:
Originally Posted by lady_express_44
Cherie, I understand where you are coming from with this. I too have been collecting research information for 15+ yrs. Most of what I have (except the links to BT1), are in notes that I wrote for myself. I have no idea where the information came from, or how much is "mine", but it seems a waste to not share it with others.
If you try a few of your sentences, from whatever you want to post, you can see if it will come up when you google. If it is verbatim, you will usually get a hit. The problem with my info is that it is often NOT verbatim, so although much of it is copied from somewhere, it's been somewhat re-worded to suit my particular purposes. (It's very likely that the info Paul posted is a combination of info he picked up from "somewhere"). That makes it hard to acknowledge an author sometimes.
The other issue is when we just remember a fact. I have no idea where I heard some of the points that I recall, but I'm not sure that it is against any copywrite law to "quote" a single fact anyway. Still, it lends credibility when we can do so.
I really like the idea of having this kind of thread though, and I hope we can find a way to start fresh.
Cherie
|
lady express (just to distinguish you from nurse Cherie):
I don't know all copyright rules either and they seem like they're changing all the time with the advent of the internet.
Just a link to Paul's website would have been sufficient anyway to share all his good information here. This didn't even have to become an issue unless someone is TRYING to take credit for work they didn't write.
I think that's the thing. We all have information we've collected. And if it's for personal use we can keep it in any form we like. But the internet is a big ol audience and that audience deserves to know who wrote the material. Even the exception of copying "for educational purposes", that only allows you to COPY it to a certain extent, it does not except anyone from the requirement to give the source. And I don't think the internet is included in the "educational" exception anyway since publications that people pay to receive want to ensure that the information isn't available publically for free by someone that has put it on the internet. Otherwise no one could publish material and charge for it if someone else has shared it publically "for educational purposes" for free. They still need to prevent that so that can earn a living. And the author definitely should get credit for writing it to begin with.
I understand that it sometimes seems unfair not to be able to share information if we can't provide the source. But if you look at the bigger picture, it also seems unfair to be able to share it and claim authorship when someone else put in the work. To me that is the bigger harm. After all, with the internet and good search engines, it's usually quite easy to find a source of material even if we don't have it in our personal materials.
I just think the authors and publishers deserve the recognition and that is the overriding concern here.