Re: Let's create an OFFICIAL A2 Library!

[Sandra Warnken <warnken@mother.com>]

Dear Arkain,

There are lots of official libraries.  In the heyday of the GS probably
every users group had one. The disks came out as DOM (disk of the month).
GSAUG has almost 500 disks in ours. 

We have a small video library (Installing the PC Transporter and an
overview of Appleworks 4.0 are among the gems). The contents of teh video
library is up on GSAUG.org.

We have a magazine library of Call A.P.P.L.E. starting in 1980 not sure
when it ends or how complete.  The limitation is space - now if we could
copy and put on disk......copyrighted material

Sandy

On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Arkain wrote:

> Read my reply below first, then come back.
> 
> It seems that libraries are protected from the copyright act. If we could
> start a public library of A2 programs and documentation, then we could
> (easily?) circumvent the copyright problem that the "vogons" seem to have
> with the A2 material. Does anyone have an idea of how to do this?
> 
> Arkain
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Frank Townsend <ftownsen@iamdigex.net>
> Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
> Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2000 6:36 PM
> Subject: Re: vogons vs Users
> 
> 
> > I think your positive approach is commendable.
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> > However, I think the effort is somewhat quixotic.
> 
> I know... The problem is in finding someone that wants to do anything about
> it. Those who complain that there's a problem don't want to act on it, while
> the others don't think there's a problem to act on. In both cases, nothing
> gets done.
> 
> > Consider these issues:
> >
> > 1.  In 1998, congress passed the Sonny Bono Copyright Term Extension Act
> > (CTEA), which *added* 20 years to existing copyrights.
> >
> > 2.  In 1999, a Constitutional challenge to the CTEA lost in the US
> District
> > Court for the District of Columbia (although an appeal is underway).
> >
> > 3.  No Copyright Act has decreased the term of copyright, or limited the
> > exclusive rights of authors (with a few exceptions such as archival
> > back-ups, time-shifting and fair use).
> >
> > 4.  The current Copyright Act already contains language (Section 108)
> which
> > allow libraries to make copies of copyrighted material for archival
> purposes
> > and to make those copies available for use within the library premises (so
> > the argument that the software will be lost forever has little validity).
> 
> The part that you're missing is in that the act refers to *printed*
> materials. This is what the law was originally designed for. This is also
> why it is required that a program's source code be printed out in order to
> submit the program for copyright. There are no provisions anywhere in the
> act to properly handle the software industry. It is very reasonable to
> assume that a song or a book will still be viable 70 years after the
> singer/author has died. The same isn't even remotely true for software.
> Except for heavily customized software that is maintained in-house, the
> likelihood of a particular version of a program lasting on the market for
> more than 10 years is nearly infinitessimal... and that's while the owner is
> still alive!
> 
> > I would conclude that there is no meaningful likelihood of amending the
> > current Copyright Act.  Practically speaking, this legislation would be
> > opposed across the software industry.
> 
> I know, but I also know how to word the request in such a way that the
> software industry couldn't refute my claims... despide the fact that IANAL.
> 
> > A final issue is that many computer programs, even ones for obsolete
> > platforms, include elements that are otherwise copyrighted (screen
> displays,
> > narrative elements, etc.).  For example, I have a commercial copy of Star
> > Trek First Contact for the Apple II (Simon & Schuster, 1988).  I have also
> > seen this game on some of the archive sites.  Whether or not this program
> is
> > sold or supported, it is impossible to conceive of an alteration in the
> > copyright law that would permit this program (while Paramount still lives
> > and breathes) to become public domain, given the strong commercial value
> of
> > the characters and story elements.
> 
> The characters and story elements are protected by a different IP act. The
> game itself as a whole is what is copyrighted. The game can be released from
> it's copyright without violation the IP priviliges of Paramount.
> 
> > Even if you limit your efforts to properties where the corporate entity
> that
> > owned the software is defunct or the authors dead, usually, these
> properties
> > have passed to some other person or entity by operation of law (heirs,
> eg).
> > And because often no one can predict when intellectual property might
> become
> > valuable, no constituency that benefits from the exclusive rights
> conferred
> > by the copyright laws is going to wish to give up these rights.
> 
> Apple 2 property is *ALREADY* valuable. I'm saying that the owners need to
> either "piss or get off the pot!" if you catch my drift.
> 
> > My advice:  concentrate you energies in two directions:  (1) encouraging
> > libraries to maintain archives of older or obsolete software (the Library
> of
> > Congress does this) and
> 
> That gives me an idea...
> Read the top if you haven't already.
> 
> > (2)  creating a credible means to validate that a
> > software work has been placed in the public domain (a clearinghouse of
> > sorts).  Many of the squabbles could be avoided if folks could be
> reasonably
> > certain that an item had been made PD.
> 
> That's what I've been saying. First try to change the authors/copyright
> holders. If that doesn't work then try to change the laws.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>