OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]
Re: Copyright basics


Duane, et al,

Canada, and, finally, the US, are signatories to the worldwide Berne Convention.

I have not been keeping track of the posts / thread leading to your comment(s), below, but I can tell you that (1) the information on the hyperlink in the message preceding yours IS quite valid; and, (2) if ANYONE --regardless of the organization type-- seeks to obscure or otherwise remove a copyright notice (either the circled "c" or a "c" in parentheticals) it is an AUTOMATIC violation of the law. Period. The US penalties are USD50K PER copyright notice that is removed. E.g., if your work was 20 pages in length, has a copyright notice on each of the twenty pages, and has been reproduced with your copyright not intact fifty times ... the LAWFUL penalty would be USD5 Million!!

This is not hyperbole. It is fact. Period. CEFACT, in this circumstance, must immediately cease and desist -- getting a preliminary injunction to stop ALL activities would take even a semi-incompetent IP lawyer less than half a day... Most of that spent in the drive time to / from court and in serving the fools.

There is no "ex post facto" either -- can't be unilaterally changing the rules after everyone's agreed to them. That would be tantamount to fraud.

Intellectual Property (IP) rights are pretty objective / clear cut. And, as you can possibly garner, my feelings are equally if not more strong in this arena.

===================
Jeffrey J Silden : Silden SOFTWARE Solutions!, Inc.
5039 Rubio Avenue : Encino  CA   91436-1139 USA
Voice - 818/788.2858 : Fax - 818/788.9858

- It's the silence
 between the notes
 that makes the music
 --  JJ Silden
===================
Confidentiality Notice:  This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.  Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.  If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message.



Duane Nickull <duane@yellowdragonsoft.com>

10/19/2003 03:06 PM

       
        To:        
        cc:        Jean-Jacques Dubray <jeanjadu@Attachmate.com>, "'Klaus-Dieter Naujok'" <knaujok@attglobal.net>, ebxml-dev@lists.ebxml.org
        Subject:        Re: Copyright basics



WITHOUT PREJUDICE:

I also have [extremely] strong feelings about the use of my work and the
removal of my name as a contributor.  I feel this is utterly illegal and
possibly actionable.  The policies of CEFACT seem to be changing with no
or little input from the members who are doing a lot of the actual work.

According to Canadian Law, any work developed by a person is subject to
defacto (also referred toas "common law rights" ) copyright protection,
whether explicitly registered or not.  Since my contributions were
created in Canada, they are subject to Canadian copyright law and I have
certain rights pursuant to those laws.  
CEFACT has changed its' copyright policy without due notification to the
authors of certain works and has used it without permission.  This was
done more than halfway through an established process we agreed to when
we joined.

I hereby request that you immediately make public the full details of
the reason for CEFACT changing its process for removing the credits of
the authors, including the following specific details:
- a list of those who were present and commenced the procedure to
change the policy
- the reason for changing the policy
- under what legal exemption CEFACT felt it can circumvent international
copyright law
-  the procedure itself that CEFACT executives feels they are entitled
to change the copyright policy without permission of the authors
- the details of any vote or other parlimentry procedure for doing such
-a copy of the minutes of the discussion held prior to any vote.

If CEFACT has a truly transparent policy, this should notbe a problem.

Respectfully


Duane Nickull






[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index]