=A0 But the good news is that the vast majority of what they produce will b=
e usable (with attribution) as fair use.=A0 Consider the following simplifi=
ed examples:=A0 =0A=A0=0AScenario 1=0A1.=A0 Go and take a picture of the Si=
stine Chapel (against the rules of the museum but it can be done ask Ron Ho=
ward).=0A2.=A0 Make a postcard of the picture and sell it as an original wo=
rk of art.=A0 You may not be allowed in the museum, and by claiming it is y=
our art you are plagiarizing, but no laws have been broken because Da Vinci=
has been dead for 400+ years.=0A=A0=0AScenario 2=0A1.=A0 Scan in a postcar=
d of the Sistine Chapel.=A0 It looks exactly the same as the one in Scenari=
o 1.=0A2.=A0 Make a postcard from the scan and sell it as an original work =
of art.=A0 You can be sued by the copyright holder of the photo used for th=
e postcard and all your profits belong to him.=0A=A0=0AScenario 3=0A1.=A0 S=
can in a postcard of the Sistine Chapel.=A0 Add a attribution for the origi=
nal card.=0A2.=A0 Make a postcard and sell it.=A0 You can be sued by the co=
pyright holder but you have not plagiarized.=0A=A0=0ABasically the WA would=
loose on a 1+1=3D2 (this has additional protections under common knowledge=
), but not if you take a screen shot of the equation and cut-and-paste it i=
nto your work without attribution (because then you are using their method =
of display), or for a commercial purpose that does not fall under fair use =
(which would also require attribution).=A0 IANAL but I think the law is sol=
idly on their side.=0A=A0=0A_J=0A=A0____________________________=0AJason at=
jasonpj@yahoo.com =0A=0A=0A=0A=0A________________________________=0AFrom: =
"Backon, Joel" <jbackon@choate.edu>=0ATo: ISED-L@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU=0ASent: W=
ednesday, May 20, 2009 9:01:25 AM=0ASubject: Re: Copyright and Wolfram Alph=
a. WAS Re: An early web 3.0 search engine is out=0A=0AI think Greg is right=
. It is unlikely Wolfram's copyright claim will hold up in a court of law. =
What the claim will do is generate good discussion in legal circles regardi=
ng the differences between a computational service and a search engine. Per=
haps Wolfram's legal staff have already anticipated the discussion.=0A=0AJo=
el=0A=0A=0AOn 5/20/09 8:49 AM, "Greg Kearney" <kearney@tribcsp.com> wrote:=
=0A=0AI would like to know how they feel they can copyright a fact? For=0Ae=
xample if I enter 1 +1 into alpha and get back the answer 2 that is a=0Afac=
t and facts can not be copyrighted under U.S. law.=0A=0AGreg=0A=0A=0AOn 20/=
05/2009, at 6:40 AM, Bill Fitzgerald wrote:=0A=0A> I just came across this =
article in Groklaw regarding Wolfram Alpha=0A> and their terms of service, =
which are different than any other=0A> search service out there. The short =
version: WA defines itself as a=0A> computational service, not a search eng=
ine. So, WA claims copyright=0A> over the results of searches performed usi=
ng its service.=0A>=0A> See http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=3D2009=
0518204959409 for=0A> more details.=0A>=0A> Cheers,=0A>=0A> Bill=0A=0A--=0A=
Joel Backon=0ADirector of Academic Technology / History=0AChoate Rosemary H=
all=0A333 Christian St.=0AWallingford, CT=A0 06492=0A203-697-2514=0A=0A[ Fo=
r info on ISED-L see http://www.gds.org/ISED-L ]=0ASubmissions to ISED-L ar=
e released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-ali=
ke license.=0ARSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=3DISED=
-L=0A=0A=0A=0A
[ 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
