Doc Savage Novels?

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

It's a bit like drug traffic: the cops want to bust the dealer. Busting the user is normally more trouble than it's worth.

Maybe, but if you're caught using, you will be busted.

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

That exists now, witness mainland China's attempts to block access to various resources elsewhere critical of the Chinese government, or the various Islamic countries imposing proxy servers at the ISP level that block access to various things considered prohibited by Islam. (Surfing for porn in a place like Saudi Arabia is a very risky thing to do.)

I know about that (well, I know about China, I hadn't heard about the Islamic blocks against porn). As much as I don't necessarily condone it, I can see it becoming mandated worldwide, even in the U.S., and even preferable, if certain political and economic disagreements aren't settled.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Why are these stories posted on Project Gutenberg Australia? So far as I can tell most of the stories are still in copyright everywhere. Did I miss something?

David M could probably tell you whether there are different regulations in place for some material, which allows Australia to post some things that the U.S., for instance, cannot... or if Australia is simply bucking copyright and depending on international borders to insulate them.

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Maybe, but if you're caught using, you will be busted.

Maybe.

In this neck of the woods, at least, you have to be pretty blatant. If a cop busts you, he has to appear in court against you. Most would rather not do that unless the bust is for something bigger than using drugs. If they are appearing in court, they aren't out on the street preventing crime.

I heard one story years back from a dealer about a cop on the beat in the park where he sold marijuana, and the beat cop came down on them. It was a case of the cop effectively saying "Show some respect. I know you are here to sell pot, and I don't care. But if you do it in front of me, I have to bust you." (Though my impression was the "didn't care" was specifically about pot. Crack/speed/smack/etc. would be another matter.)

I know about that (well, I know about China, I hadn't heard about the Islamic blocks against porn). As much as I don't necessarily condone it, I can see it becoming mandated worldwide, even in the U.S., and even preferable, if certain political and economic disagreements aren't settled.

We'll see. The Internet is a powerful incentive to come up with such agreements.
______
Dennis

[DMcCunney]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

David M could probably tell you whether there are different regulations in place for some material, which allows Australia to post some things that the U.S., for instance, cannot... or if Australia is simply bucking copyright and depending on international borders to insulate them.

AFAIK, the Kenneth Robeson stuff is illegal in Oz, too, but the likelyhood of CN going after a site in Oz is slim. It's an order of magnitude more difficult and expensive, so your second hypothesis is more likely.
______
Dennis

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

The Internet is a powerful incentive to come up with such agreements.

I would amend that to say: The Internet caused a lot of disagreements. Money is a powerful incentive to come up with such agreements.

[Nate the great]

Originally Posted by Nate the great

Why are these stories posted on Project Gutenberg Australia? So far as I can tell most of the stories are still in copyright everywhere. Did I miss something?

It turns out I was right. I sent them an email about the Doc Savage content. Here is the reply:

Kenneth Robeson is a house name. If the actual author is not known, then
copyright is 50 years from publication. When I posted these books I was not
aware that the actual authors were known. Since posting I have become aware that
the authors are known. Now that you have made a point of bringing it to my
attention, I have removed the files.

Regards

Colin Choat

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Bye-bye, Doc...

[HarryT]

Excellent - well done!

[erikk]

wow, if that's not sarcasm then I think I was thinking just about the opposite.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by DMcCunney

I never said what you did before was illegal, though that will depend upon where you live and what laws govern you. I was asking specifically about Sweden: if you host material on a site in Sweden, and someone claims they own the rights and ask you to take the material down, and provides what you would consider proof that they owned the rights, what happens if you refuse to take it down? Are you then in violation of Swedish law? Can you be taken to court and compelled to remove the material? I'll be very surprised if the answer is not yes to both questions.

Yes, the anser is yes to both questions.

I just wanted to emphazise that what you had reason to believe is important.

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

(Huh... to me, that's like saying it's not illegal to loot something from a broken storefront display... it's only illegal to break the window...)

That is just because you mistakenly think in terms of theft. Think in terms of copyright violation and it will be rather natural. It is like if somebody broke down a door and you passed and took a photograph of what you saw.

[Steven Lyle Jordan]

Originally Posted by tompe

That is just because you mistakenly think in terms of theft. Think in terms of copyright violation and it will be rather natural. It is like if somebody broke down a door and you passed and took a photograph of what you saw.

Based on your example, "taking a photograph" would equate to seeing a book's cover through the open door. I'm talking about taking its contents to read, or walking in the door and taking property out. Not the same thing.

And that's because you do not think downloading a document that was not duly authorized to be "online and available" is theft. Clearly we disagree on that.

I get that Swedish law sees the taking of an e-book as "taking nothing." What I don't see is how Sweden can equate an intellectual creation protected by copyright law, in electronic or any form, as "nothing." That seems to say that no intellectual property has value in Sweden... other than the paper and ink it's printed on. And I have a hard time believing Sweden believes that.

[Alexander Turcic]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

(Huh... to me, that's like saying it's not illegal to loot something from a broken storefront display... it's only illegal to break the window...)

This is definitely the case for Switzerland.

http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/96732

[tompe]

Originally Posted by Steve Jordan

Based on your example, "taking a photograph" would equate to seeing a book's cover through the open door. I'm talking about taking its contents to read, or walking in the door and taking property out. Not the same thing.

Why. I tale the image to be able to look at it ("read") later.

I get that Swedish law sees the taking of an e-book as "taking nothing." What I don't see is how Sweden can equate an intellectual creation protected by copyright law, in electronic or any form, as "nothing." That seems to say that no intellectual property has value in Sweden... other than the paper and ink it's printed on. And I have a hard time believing Sweden believes that.

The laws in Sweden was changed a couple of years ago so now it is illegal to download copyrighted material. But it is copyright infringent or something similar that is the crime. It is not theft. And it is not theft in the US or UK according to what people have written about the laws in these countries here.

You get a monopol to distribute intellectual property. It is the monopol that has value. Why confuse the monopol with the intellectual item?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by erikk

wow, if that's not sarcasm then I think I was thinking just about the opposite.

You think that notifying a site that they are perhaps hosting material which could get them into trouble is not a good thing to do? PG Australia is a wonderful resource - the last thing we want is for them to get shut down. Telling them that something that's there infringes copyright and could get them shut down, so that they can remove it, is in everybody's interest.

Do you disagree?