enforce
copyright on common knowledge questions. They appear to be making
essentially an academic-type claim. They have taken existing facts and
compiled them together in ways that may or may not have ever existed =
before.
This is similar to a doctoral thesis which refers to data collected
originally by other people/organizations (eg: Census Bureau) but =
analyzes it
in new ways. That thesis IS copyrightable. The copyright isn't on the
original data but on the product of analysis and synthesis of the data.
Scenario: You ask W/A to compare two mildly obscure data points from =
two
atypical groups (eg televisions per capita and infant mortality rates =
for
Bosnia & Herzegovina and Brazil). W/A is stating that it is possible =
that
nobody has ever put that particular combination of data together before.
Thus, it is appropriate to cite W/A and not just the underlying sources =
of
their chart. That parallels the way you would cite a thesis paper which
synthesized these data points.
As for Google, they cannot claim copyright over anything because their
search engine doesn't PRODUCE anything, other than a list of what other
people have done. It is entirely INappropriate to cite Google images, =
for
example, as the source of a photograph (of the Sistine Chapel or =
otherwise).
Google didn't take the picture or give you the right to use it. Google
effectively has said that, while they are creating an environment which
enables plagiarizing and theft, they are not responsible because they =
TOLD
you to 'follow the law.' It is ultimately the person copying the =
image/text
who is responsible.
Just my take on their statements. The Groklaw site has an interesting
comment from a lawyer re software-generated content being copyrightable,
even if it was original. Hmmm. Although I am not a lawyer, I would =
think
that W/A's claims would hold up in most circumstances **in which they =
would
choose to enforce them.**
Dan Berger
JPDS-NC
-----Original Message-----
From: A forum for independent school educators
[mailto:ISED-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU] On Behalf Of Jason Johnson
Sent: Wednesday, May 20, 2009 1:28 PM
To: ISED-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU
Subject: Re: Copyright and Wolfram Alpha. WAS Re: An early web 3.0 =
search
engine is out
I would bet that they have and they have some deep roots in copyright =
law.=A0
But the good news is that the vast majority of what they produce will be
usable (with attribution) as fair use.=A0 Consider the following =
simplified
examples:=A0=20
=A0
Scenario 1
1.=A0 Go and take a picture of the Sistine Chapel [...message truncated]
On 20/05/2009, at 6:40 AM, Bill Fitzgerald wrote:
> I just came across this article in Groklaw regarding Wolfram Alpha
> and their terms of service, which are different than any other
> search service out there. The short version: WA defines itself as a
> computational service, not a search engine. So, WA claims copyright
> over the results of searches performed using its service.
>
> See http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=3D20090518204959409 for
> more details.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Bill
--
Joel Backon
Director of Academic Technology / History
Choate Rosemary Hall
333 Christian St.
Wallingford, CT=A0 06492
203-697-2514
[ For info on ISED-L see http://www.gds.org/ISED-L ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED-L
