Re: beautifully reworked wiki page

[Graham Percival]

On Fri, Dec 17, 2010 at 3:30 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
>
>> In my non-expert (I am not a lawyer) opinion, the current except on
>> the German page would contravene Canadian copyright law.
>
> It depends on whether the quote makes sense for working with/from.  Not
> every attributed quote is illegal.

I'm specifically thinking of "alternatives to the dealing", stemming
from the 2004 CCH Canadian Ltd v Law Society of Upper Canada supreme
court case.  Stockhausen is not the only composer to use cross-staff
beams or the like, so there are plenty of non-copyrighted works which
could be used instead.


> The amount to which the media industry considers their customers enemies
> who must not be allowed to make _any_ sensible use of their purchases is
> really absurd.

Oh, I agree -- I would even go so far as to call that behaviour
immoral.  And I definitely think that copyright laws should be
changed, and I optimistically think that they /will/ change over the
next 10-30 years.  But that doesn't change the actual current legal
standing of various (entirely reasonable) actions under current
legislation and judicial precedence.

Cheers,
- Graham