Archives for posts with tag: public domain
I consider that  public funded projects output must be open, whether it is OER, Open data, Open access, etc. That is one of the challenges I have been facing with my thesis, I started from an advocate perspective. 🙂
Although personally, I use everything that I come across that I consider relevant for the objectives I want to achieve, including copyrighted material (if I can´t find it under a flexible license) and mix them together.  I request permission for the copyright material and make a disclaimer stating that they arecopyrighted materials and authorizations to reuse them should be requested. The studies are made available under a Creative Commons license.
I am each time more convinced that it is critical to learn IPR, in school, not from a negative perspective (the usual not to steal/punishment mode!) but from a positive, constructive, creative, rights perspective. It would for sure get a lot of kids, students, teachers looking at what they do from quite a different perspective of worthness and value. They would know/ have an informed choice as to how they wanted to share their creations, as CC0, copyrighted, flexible licenses…
The other day in a forum, the position it was that IPR is just for developed countries and big corporations…I consider that right now it protects much better the ownership/authorship (depending on national legislations and whether the countries are signatories to Berne Convention) for  authors from whenever they are. Having said that, I am also in total disagreement of getting back to public domain as default for the creator, unless it is registered, as then it will be a privilege of developed countries and a total backlash for authors/owners from developing countries. Then, the colleagues from that forum would be absolutely right!

There was recently a very public case “monkey business” between wikimedia/Slater. In short, a monkey had taken a selfie with Slater´s camera. The photo was posted in wikimedia under public domain. Slater considered that he owned the copyrights to the photo. You can read a liitle bit more about the case in here:

In the meantime, in August U.S. Copyright Office launched the ”

Compendium of U.S. Copyright Office Practices, Third Edition”

where this is explicitly defined, including even if you are the owner, it is not considered a copyright.

306 The Human Authorship Requirement
The U.S. Copyright Office will register an original work of authorship, provided that the
work was created by a human being.
The copyright law only protects “the fruits of intellectual labor” that “are founded in the
creative powers of the mind.” Trade-Mark Cases, 100 U.S. 82, 94 (1879). Because
copyright law is limited to “original intellectual conceptions of the author,” the Office
will refuse to register a claim if it determines that a human being did not create the
work. Burrow-Giles Lithographic Co. v. Sarony, 111 U.S. 53, 58 (1884).
The Office will not register works produced by nature, animals, or plants. Likewise, the
Office cannot register a work purportedly created by divine or supernatural beings,
although the Office may register a work where the application or the deposit copy(ies)
state that the work was inspired by a divine spirit.
• A photograph taken by a monkey.
• A mural painted by an elephant.
• A claim based on the appearance of actual animal skin.
• A claim based on driftwood that has been shaped and smoothed by
the ocean.”

Therefore, only human beings can claim authorship of works. This means that monkeys selfies are…public domain.