3 ms·
I do hope that the videos themselves are accompanied by a copyleft or otherwise liberal license.
by callahad 18y ago
I do hope that the videos themselves are accompanied by a copyleft or otherwise liberal license.
- alecco 18y agoIf it is going to be produced by the US government wouldn't it belong to the state, therefore to US citizens?
- Anon84 18y agoFollowing your logic... should any citizen be given access to the plans of american nukes? "it was produced by the US government, it belongs to the state and therefore to US citizens".
- tsuraan 18y agoNot logic, just law: in general, government publications aren't covered by copyright. For more details, you could JFGI, or have a look at the wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_of_the_United_States_Government http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_of_the_United_States_Gover... . To the best of my knowledge, US nuke plans aren't generally published. Obama's speeches on Youtube certainly are. Edit: just noticed that this link is also below. Oh well, it's a somewhat different posting than the one below.
- alecco 18y agoI think you missed my [question] mark. Unless you thought it was [a rhetorical question.] If [you thought] so, my inexcusably poor English structure is to blame. Thanks for the link, it is very insightful and adds to the conversation. [Edit: My first comment used the word "belong" and not "copyright." It wasn't by accident as I was thinking it could be public domain.]
- alecco 18y agoNo, your statement doesn't follow my logic. 1 OP: Hopes for Copyleft license. 2 My reply: [The public video] would belong to the State [therefore to US citizens.] 3 Your smart-ass reply: [Something else owned by the state, not public] belongs to the State, so it should be public. I think yours qualifies as refuse by converse fallacy of accident. But you don't just make a wrong generalization, you also change the reason: copyright vs. disclosure. If you followed my logic, it would be: The plans of American nukes were produced by the government, therefore they belong to US citizens. In fact, my post has a question mark as I am not a US citizen and I don't fully understand state ownership, so I wasn't even making a statement. While there, as you came full aggressive, let's review your grammar: * After ellipsis, capitalize (perhaps it should just be a comma.) * [It's] American, not "american." * Again capitalize after quotation mark. [Edit: Capitalize after question mark, not after quotation mark.] And you are not quoting me or anybody else so there is no need of quotation marks. My disclaimer: my English is poor as I am foreign and last time I studied logic was over 15 years ago.
- aaronblohowiak 18y agoI appreciate your use of logic and reasoning, but as a point of fact, you are wrong about quotation mark usage. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark Quotation marks are overloaded in english =)
- alecco 18y agoThank you <:D [I actually hate grammar-nazis and love gramar-nazi-nazis. The tone of my response and the grammar part was mocking the logic-nazi FAIL ;)]
- DarkShikari 18y agoAll* works of the US government are under public domain anyways: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_of_the_United_States_Government http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_of_the_United_States_Gover... *almost, with a few exceptions
- mynameishere 18y agowith a few exceptions http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4837061 http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4837061 Government workers classified over 15 million documents last year, more than twice the number classified in 2001
- Retric 18y agoMost of these Classified documents will still probably be in the public domain before the any of the bond movies.
- aaronblohowiak 18y agoThanks, Disney ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Bono_Copyright_Term_Extension_Act http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Bono_Copyright_Term_Exten... )