Copyright 2006 Arthur A. Armstrong
A Common Place Book/compilation/compendium/Chrestomathy --serving scholars, readers, writers and publishers. . The purpose is to help writers & researchers find cultural materials and help disseminate cultural knowledge. In compliance with Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonization of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society. (paragraph d) fair use. Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Articles 47(2),55 and 95 thereof.
We believe scholarisland constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material in accordance also with Title 17 U.S. C. Section 107 & Title 17, USC, Section 512(c) (2)...See www.law.cornell.edu/uscode17/usc
*procedure for making claims of copyright infringement
If you are the author of a non-fiction book you believe should be listed on this Chrestomathy-you may send us a copy of your book for our perusal. We cannot return the book, and the book becomes our property. & we will make the editorial decision of whether your book fits our Chrestomathy. Generally if a book doesn't cover new ground we don't list it.
ALSO: If you spot any problems or errors....please let us know.
In accordance with Title 17, USC, Section 512(c) please send the following to Copyright Agent of scholarisland.
(*If you you own copyrighted material on this site that you don't wish to share with scholars, please provide us with the following:)
A. identify the material that you claim & tell us what category it is in
B. A statement that you are the owner of the copyrighted material.
C. A statement that the information on the notification is accurate & that the the complainant is the owner of the copyrighted material or is authorized to act on behalf of the owner.
C. Signature & date of the complainant with address or contact information.
Upon receipt of the above we will move promptly to deal with the problem.
**additionally www.scholarisland.org is a work in progress, that when complete will be hooked directly to book stores, allowing anyone who reads material in scholarisland access to buy books (either new or used or in electronic form). It further will list additional books by or about the author. This will be a new and permanent way to make sales for authors. This is a type of "Research Engine" that is intended to aid in book sales of books & provide this information globally.
Arthur Allan Armstrong
"Before reviewing the scope of the fair dealing exception under the Copyright Act, It is important to clarify some general considerations about exceptions to copyright infringement. Procedurally a defendant is required to prove that his or her dealing with a work has been fair; however, the fair dealing exception is perhaps more properly understood as an integral part of the Copyright Act than simply a defense. Any act, is a user's right. In order to maintain the proper balance between the rights of a copyright owner and users' interests, it must not be interpreted restrictively. As Professor Vaver, supra, has explained at p.171: "User rights are not just loopholes. both owner rights and user rights should therefore be given the fair and balanced reading that befits remedial legislation."
Canadian Ltd. v. Law Society of Upper Canada, The Chief Justice
"Fair use should not be considered a bizarre, occasionally tolerated departure from the grand conception of the copyright monopoly. To the contrary, it is a necessary part of the overall design."
-Judge Pierre Leval, of the United States Court of Appeals in Manhattan
"If nature has made any one thing less susceptible than all others of exclusive property it is the action of the thinking power called an idea, which an individual may exclusively possess as long as he keeps it to himself; but the moment it is divulged, it forces itself into the possession of everyone, and the receiver cannot dispossess himself of it. Its peculiar character, too, is that no one possesses the less, because every other possesses the whole of it. he who receives an idea from me, receives instruction himself without lessening mine; as he who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me. That ideas should freely spread from one to another over the globe, for the moral and mutual instruction of man, and improvement of his condition, seems to have been peculiarly and benevolently designed by nature, when she made them, like fire, expansible over all space, without lessening their density at any point, and like the air in which we breathe, move, and have our physical being, incapable of confinement or exclusive appropriation. Inventions then cannot, in nature, be a subject of property."
"It takes a thousand men to invent a telegraph, or a steam engine, or a phonograph, or a photograph, or a telephone or any other important thing-and the last man gets credit and we forget the others. He added his little mite-that is all he did. These object lessons should teach us that ninety-nine parts of all things that proceed from the intellect are plagiarism, pure and simple; and the lesson ought to make us modest. But nothing can do that."
"The enactment of copyright legislation by Congress under the terms of the Constitution is not based on any natural right that the author has in his writings, for the Supreme Court (in Wheaton v. Peters) has held that such rights as he has are purely statutory rights, but upon the ground that the welfare of the public will be served and progress of science and useful arts will be promoted by securing to authors for limited periods the exclusive right to their writings. The Constitution does not establish copyrights, but provides that congress shall have the power to grant such rights if it thinks best. Not primarily for the benefit of the author, but primarily for the benefit of the public such rights are given. Not that any particular class of citizens, however worthy, may benefit, but because the policy is believed to be for the benefit of the great body of people, in that it will stimulate writing and invention, to give some bonus to authors and inventors."
(In 1909, in passing a new copyright act, Congress addressed the basis for copyright in the United States:)
"It may seem unfair that much of the fruit of the compiler's labor may be used by others without compensation. As Justice Brennan has correctly observed, however, this is not "some unforeseen byproduct of a statutory scheme".....it is rather, "the essence of copyright,"....and a constitutional requirement. The primary goal of copyright is not to reward authors, but "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts."
-Justice O'Connor, for a unanimous Court.....Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Company
"Intellectual (and artistic) progress is possible only if each author builds on the work of others. No one invents even a tiny fraction of the ideas that make up our cultural heritage. Once a work has been written and published, any rule requiring people to compensate the author slows progress in literature and art, making useful expressions "too expensive," forcing authors to re-invent the wheel, and so on. Every work uses scraps of thought from thousands of predecessors, far too many to compensate even if the legal system were frictionless, which it isn't. Because any new work depends on others even if unconsciously, broad protection of intellectual property also creates a distinct possibility that the cost of litigation-old authors trying to get a "piece of the action" from current successes-will prevent or penalize the production of new works, even though the claims be rebuffed."
-Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook of the United States Court of Appeals
Shakespeare, Pirate: An Internet Tale
To the Editor:
Re "Would the Bard Have Survived the Web?" by Scott Turrow, Paul Aiken and James Shapiro (Op-Ed Feb 15)
By our standards, Shakespeare was an intellectual property pirate. he took his plots and characters from other writers for free. (He didn't pay the author of "Romeus and Juliet.") He routinely cribbed passages, sometimes nearly word for word, from other books.
"King Lear" borrows from an older play, and a history book, and a romance by Sir Phillip Sidney, and a pamphlet about exorcists. A work of individual genius? A mashup? It's both. But it couldn't be published today.
"Pirates" who acted his plays with paying (once on a ship off the African coast) didn't hurt his art. Excessively strict and lengthy property rights did . Fifty years after he died, one acting company still "owned" King Lear." No one else could act it, so the owners could change it as they liked. (Two words: happy ending.)
Today's copyright terms are the longest and strictest in history. Making those laws, even more excessive won't deter pirates: unreasonable laws will make reasonable protection harder to defend."
-James J. Marino The writer is an associate professor of English at Cleveland State University and the author of "Owning William Shakespeare: The King's Men and Their Intellectual property
138 Tunnel Dr.
Canon City. Co 81212 or e-mail email@example.com