5 ms·

"De minimis" (minimal) changes won't create a derivative work. What counts as "de minimis" has been debated extensively, but sales stickers certainly do. Creat

"De minimis" (minimal) changes won't create a derivative work. What counts as "de minimis" has been debated extensively, but sales stickers certainly do. Creating derivative work is only illegal if you do it without permission from the copyright owner of the original work. I don't know what you mean by "doesn't seem very valid". It is the law [1]. Annotations normally create a derivative work. That being said, annotations often end up being covered by fair usage (fair dealing in the UK). [1] 17 U.S. Code § 106 (2) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/106

coldtea 11y ago
>I don't know what you mean by "doesn't seem very valid". It is the law Apparently it's not the law, as the link doesn't contain the words "distributed or used in any other way" or anything to the effect of "any other way". Plus, the "de minimis" thing and fair use exceptions mentioned in your second comment, already scale down the absolute "any other way" qualifier.
- DrJokepu 11y ago
  I think you may be misunderstanding something. The owner of the copyright has exclusive rights to prepare derivative works (or authorise someone else to do so). There are certain exceptions. What's unclear about this? Maybe "used in any other way" confuses you? It's standard legal language and it means publishing, public performance, creating mechanical copies, etc. The possible uses of a copyrighted work are numerous and due to advances in technology that list grows constantly. This expression makes it unnecessary to list every known possible use, or yet-to-be-discovered futures uses.
  - coldtea 11y ago
    >I think you may be misunderstanding something. The owner of the copyright has exclusive rights to prepare derivative works (or authorise someone else to do so). There are certain exceptions. What's unclear about this? The fact that "certain exceptions" weren't mentioned in the first comment. I quote: "the copyright owner of the original work has the exclusive right to prepare derivative works, regardless of whether the derivative work is published, distributed or used in any other way." There was no reference to "certain exceptions", "fair use" and the possibility of "minimal" (and thus allowed) changes. That, plus the use of "used in any other way" (a "standard legal language" as you say) as part of a casual language comment, left the impression to the reader that only the copyright owner or someone with permission from them can create derivative works, period. So while this is cleared out now after the extra explanations, the initial comment was quite unclear.

coldtea 11y ago

>I don't know what you mean by "doesn't seem very valid". It is the law Apparently it's not the law, as the link doesn't contain the words "distributed or used in any other way" or anything to the effect of "any other way". Plus, the "de minimis" thing and fair use exceptions mentioned in your second comment, already scale down the absolute "any other way" qualifier.

DrJokepu 11y ago
I think you may be misunderstanding something. The owner of the copyright has exclusive rights to prepare derivative works (or authorise someone else to do so). There are certain exceptions. What's unclear about this? Maybe "used in any other way" confuses you? It's standard legal language and it means publishing, public performance, creating mechanical copies, etc. The possible uses of a copyrighted work are numerous and due to advances in technology that list grows constantly. This expression makes it unnecessary to list every known possible use, or yet-to-be-discovered futures uses.
- coldtea 11y ago
  >I think you may be misunderstanding something. The owner of the copyright has exclusive rights to prepare derivative works (or authorise someone else to do so). There are certain exceptions. What's unclear about this? The fact that "certain exceptions" weren't mentioned in the first comment. I quote: "the copyright owner of the original work has the exclusive right to prepare derivative works, regardless of whether the derivative work is published, distributed or used in any other way." There was no reference to "certain exceptions", "fair use" and the possibility of "minimal" (and thus allowed) changes. That, plus the use of "used in any other way" (a "standard legal language" as you say) as part of a casual language comment, left the impression to the reader that only the copyright owner or someone with permission from them can create derivative works, period. So while this is cleared out now after the extra explanations, the initial comment was quite unclear.