[Humanist] 29.497 granting permission (or not)

Humanist Discussion Group willard.mccarty at mccarty.org.uk
Tue Nov 24 10:05:50 CET 2015


                 Humanist Discussion Group, Vol. 29, No. 497.
            Department of Digital Humanities, King's College London
                       www.digitalhumanities.org/humanist
                Submit to: humanist at lists.digitalhumanities.org



        Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2015 11:05:22 +0000
        From: "Norman Gray" <norman at astro.gla.ac.uk>
        Subject: Re: [Humanist] 29.491 granting permission (or not)
        In-Reply-To: <20151121074753.A31B86FA7 at digitalhumanities.org>


Greetings

On 21 Nov 2015, at 7:47, Humanist Discussion Group wrote:

>       Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2015 11:24:28 +0000
>       From: "Alexander O'Connor" <alexander.oconnor at dcu.ie>
>       Subject: Re:  29.487 granting permission (or not)
>       In-Reply-To: <20151120111525.BE7B86F32 at digitalhumanities.org>
>
>
> How does CC-BY-SA affect forwarding an email or quoting it to private
> correspondents?

I think the simple answer would be: not at all.  An email on Humanist is 
still just an email.

The various CC licences [1] are intended to clarify things in the case 
where a copyright question is asked, but I don't think they need intrude 
on other questions.  In the case which Willard brought up here, if the 
Pearson checker had discovered that Humanist contributions were 
available with a CC-BY licence, then they could have promptly deduced 
that quoting the posting, whole or in part, would be permitted, and 
moved on.  If they'd found a CC-BY-NC (the 'NC' means 'no commercial 
use'), I don't know what they could really conclude, because they're not 
interested, in this case, in repurposing the text, but only in quoting 
it.

This setup works better for Wikipedia (for example) than it would work 
for Humanist, I think.  Wikipedia articles are a more-or-less extensive 
bit of text, which one can imagine wishing to repurpose, with 
permission.  A Humanist posting doesn't match that straightforwardly.

Rather than getting into a licence hole, it might be better to add to 
the one-line remarks in the list footer a text 'To quote from Humanist, 
see http://...'

At that URL, Humanist could add text such as:

All of the contributions to Humanist are copyright the authors.  You are 
encouraged to cite these contributions, entire or in part, via a 
citation such as 'Surname, Forename (month-year). Humanist list, online, 
nn.nnn, "Subject line..."; URL: http://xxx.example.org'

That prompts the question: what should the xxx.example.org be?  The 
current archive at 
 http://dhhumanist.org/Archives/Current/Humanist.vol29.txt  is just a 
dump of the email messages.

Best wishes,

Norman

[1] For the CC licences see the Creative Commons site 
 http://creativecommons.org  and the Wikipedia overview 
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creative_Commons>

-- 
Norman Gray  :  https://nxg.me.uk
SUPA School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, UK





More information about the Humanist mailing list