Welcome to Etherpad!

This pad text is synchronized as you type, so that everyone viewing this page sees the same text. This allows you to collaborate seamlessly on documents!

To prevent your pad from appearing in the archive, put the word __NOPUBLISH__ (including the surrounding double underscores) anywhere in this pad. Changes will be reflected after the next archive update.

Warning: DirtyDB is used. This is fine for testing but not recommended for production. -- To suppress these warning messages change suppressErrorsInPadText to true in your settings.json Guest Malcolm
also see: http://etherbox.local/pad/p/legal

member of FSF Europe
helped translate law to CC Spain
lawyer working in UK + Spain, based in Barcelona
specialized in IT, international clients
-> mainly copyright, trademarks...

looking at re-use, common use, community projects

4 correct statements of intellectual property law
4 incorrect statements of intellectual property law

nhp, fc poppesnor, abbasabam, UT, FR-FR, Mandarine, volapack, ...

le droit d'auteur n' existe que pour l'industrie, pas pour l'individu
quand tu vends ton droit d'auteur , tu ne peut plus faire une version avancée du produits
le droi t d'auteur n'existe pas tant que tu n'est pas informé sur la loi
quand tu laisse s le logo origin a le sur le nouveau produit on accomplit notre devoir (a attribué le auteur)
le droit d'auteur existe seulement quand tu porte plainte (et la plupart ne le fait pas)

- if you create something it is your intellectual proprety
if you are student/ individual it is yours, only exception:   if your are an employee the rights belong to the company or if you sign specific contract )
It's an abuse of the University to take the IP from the students
-  le droit d'auteur n'existe que pour l'industrie, pas pour l'individu
- can we sell/loose all your copyrights
moral rights are always yours, economic rights
- you can youse images if you attribute the source
no, all the righs are reserved (some exceptions: educational, dissertation...)
- your boss automatically owns copyright on what you produce
no , unless the contract says that it goes to the employee + you have to be hired for that (job description)
-  with creative commons you cannot make money
you can create service around your product
it depends of what kind of CC you chose
- intellectual property is linked ot a physical/natural person -> true
- open source is a license 
no, it is not, a way of
- foklore, tradional heritage can be protected by copyright
it depends   (chinese bridge - japanese sword, pakistan, ...), who are you going to grant the copyright to
traditional crafts are trying to protect this, because they think creative industry is exploiting
- quand tu vends ton droit d'auteur , tu ne peut plus faire une version avancée du produits
it depends, if the contract is sold exclusive, you lose it vs non-exclusive
- all countries must respect intellectual property rights ( > copyright/patents, trademark, design, ... unless you speak French (droits intellectuels de propriété = copyight)) / intellectual property is recognized eveyrwhere
maybe Butan not
it is a tricky question because you used 'intellectual property rights'
- copyright lasts longer than patents on models/designs
no, patents can expire, copyright lasts 70 years after the death of the author; by default 
if produced by company: date of publication + 70y ears
patents = 20y
trademarks, models = 10y
we don't need to register, to apply copyright (droit d'auteur)
yes, since 1970
in US in order to sue someone, you have to register your artwork first
- works are excluded from protection if they're not in a tangible form
originality + materialized + form of expression
- patents cost money everywhere


The term 'intellectual property' is very bad - only useful in French or italian.
It is divided in 2 areas:
    * Intellectual proprety: copyright/author's right: artistic, scientifc, literary
       it covers nearly anything you can create, paintings, film, audiovisual works, blueprints, drawings, blue prints, choreographiessculptures, software, books , ....
       every version has different copyrights: f.ex; documenting of the copyrighted work is 2 level (machine translation has no copyright)
       ORIGINAL (UK: it is not a copy) ( rest: imprint/spirit of the authors charchter)
       work you do within your work functions (employee), are generally assigned to the employer
       students can go to court, is abuse because students cannot negociate
       what happens if you have many authors?
       this is not harmonized world wide
       * joint work > horizontal collaboration (nobody knows who did what) 
       * collective work > vertical relationship : editor +contributors

    * industrial property
= Design, Patents , trademarks
split was made because at one point one thought that only this part would have economical effect

* Patents/Brevets
protects an invention (abstract idea)
product or process
technical solution for a technical problem
not everything is patentable: not natural phenomenons (ex basmati rice, genome, way of doing business, mathematical formula, software...)
-> you can patent a mutation of a gene (if you can force nature to do something new)

25 y of debate about patenting software
if software has direct impact outside the computer, it is patentable
f.ex. controls the ABS of a car (yes)
f.ex. software that calculates index rate in my computer / running video games
-> lots of fighting about it (f.ex. FB facial recognition of friends)
-> US is tending towards European law, no more patents on everything
f.ex. 1-click button patent (Amazon) was invalidated 

    * territorial (vs copyright = international), patent in US has no impact in Spain!
    * you have to register, lasts for 20y, costs money, up to 20000€ in EU (each of 35 countries or ask process of EU patent - EPO - or WW patent application for countries you have chosen (is treated in Geneva))
    most African countries don't care, no one applies for patents there
    NEW no one has published anywhere at any time, first come first served
    NOT OBVIOUS normal engineer or scientist would say 'ha, good idea'
-> a lot of software programs fail, because they're not new/obvious
-> patent covers idea!
-> citizens have 2 months to object the application

* Trade Mark
word, colour, logo or picture
must be different than what already exists (not identical + not confusing vidually or auditive)
is territorial
is linked to class of products & services (ex Ubuntu for software vs Ubuntu for cola)
déposé dans registres nationals, expensive
European trademark office.  ??? https://oami.europa.eu/ohimportal/en/home
-> citizens have 2 months to object the application
-> if you missed opportunity to oppose, you can go to court
lasts for 10y, but can be renewed endlessly
ex Le Petit Prince is now a trade mark (the drawing + the name)
ex. Makea 'anything on the web is commerce' -> can lead to confusion (Ika will find 500 users + 3 experts withnessing about confusion)

* Design
protect 2D/3D shapes
has to be new / 'unique characteristics'
costs money
last 25y (not renewable) for registered works.
last 3 years for unregistered works.
ex. Samsung/Apple phone => square is natural shape!
if you don't register: it lasts for 3y!!! but you must not copy
ex. 3D printing of object of non-registered design in 3y period, a photograph + copy = infriction

life of design patents have expired -> claim copyright
ex. design objects of 60s : they're now claiming that it was artistic product -> every photograph/copy is illegal

Moral rights
right to be called author / right to publish
right to take it back as author but you have to compensate the people who claimed moral right (not in US, yes in EU, half in UK)

US/UK: Fair use
if you use copyrighted object in manner that it does not affect author, ok
private use, educational use, parody, scientific use
is very flexible in US

in EU a strict list of exceptions, each one has rules
** private use: you can make private copy but you can not release your copy to a community
-> you can tell person where to find it
Fablab: you can share the way you build it, but the 3D file you cannot share, you can tell people where to find it
** education you can use part of text 
in Spain: you can only do this in public schools and formal education (not postgraduates, ...)
you can use it for research, fine, you can publish teh results + methods as a new work
** citation
no problem
** religious ceremony
catholic church did not want to pay royalties for choir music -> negociated
** cultural institutions, libraries
can make objects public & sell pictures
but there can be a problem of access


Creative Commons
Attribution: mention original author with url link
Share Alike: if you do derivate work and publish it, you have to do it under the same license
Non Derivative: you cannot change work
Non Commercial: commercial entity or commercial activity ex university?
big debate, never solved

what are the 4 freedoms? freedom to (0) execute, (1) study, (2) modify, (3) redistribute the improvement
what is the condition to have the 4 freedoms: the source code

what is a "derivative work"? no common deifnition, it depends of the country
-> modification
-> adaptation: novel for film
-> transformation: based on original work (is dangerous/how much is based inspiration?)
ex if 3D model is very detailed, doesn't need any change, you're making a "reproduction"
ex photograph used as illustration to text: no derivative work
if you take out photograph and my text is not legible? not derivative
you write plugin for autocad, only usable with autocad, derivative work? it depends! 
if you program driver for linux without modifying kernel? -> in 2 months time German court will tell us (virtual machine guys)

what is copyleft? you can modify, and if you publish, publish under same license
various ways of copylefting

is this free: "ok for any academic non commercial use" -> no, exception to copyright
'free'  = not allowed to add restrictions
in software, they say there are no moral rights
in continental EU nothing is really ever free, author has always right to call back

is this free: "Do not evil"  - JSON license
yes, what is 'evil'? comes from Mormon/Christian programmer

is it a good idea to use a CC license for hardware design? no, use FREE ART LICENSE
what do you do with hardware design? any object.
copy, transform, distribute = copyright
print, make physical object -> license does not cover this, do you need license for that?  no but if it is artistic: CAREFUL!
but there is better license for this: open hardware license: section on 'making' + 'patents' = more complete, related to blueprint
MIT license: it includes manufacture (normal licenses don't talk about manufacturing)

si objet n'a pas valeur artistique: créer blueprint à partir de photo de cet objet = nouvel oeuvre créee indépendamment
CC ne prennent en compte design licenses = problem

is a fablab 'non-commercial'? the charter says yes
who is doing what?
fees: just cover cost
activities of people in the lab = this is independent, ex Medialab Prado: companies coming in to develop prototypes // individual making several copies & sell

do I have to publish under CC.SA the photos of an object created from a CC.SA blueprint? it is covered by copyright?
if object is artistic: yes
if object is non artistic: no

GPL: copyleft on derivative works + on works based on derivative works
if you write application for linux, it is 'based on' linux, 'based on' is included in GPL -> virtual machine VIMWare
difference user space & kernel space
-> ex skin for Drupal is outside (userspace), if you make module it is inside (kernel)

STRONG: GPL / AGPL : derivative works + based + using (Python)
WEAK: Mozilla, LGPL: derivative works // based on/using with whatever license
PERMISSIVE: Apache, MIT, BSD / not obliged to publish under same license (Ruby, Python)