 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Cousin Ricky
Subject: Ping SharkD: legal question about the Munsell module
Date: 19 Dec 2014 12:20:40
Message: <54945e68$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
First of all, the Web page URL has changed:
http://www.rit.edu/cos/colorscience/rc_munsell_renotation.php
But my main concern is RIT's terms of use. According to these terms,
the contents of the Web site are for personal, noncommercial use only.
IANAL, but to me, these terms don't appear to be compatible with the
LGPL. Do you have some assurance (preferably written) that the Munsell
data are not covered by these restrictions, or have you otherwise
contacted RIT about their use?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Le Forgeron
Subject: Re: Ping SharkD: legal question about the Munsell module
Date: 19 Dec 2014 13:35:48
Message: <54947004$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Le 19/12/2014 18:20, Cousin Ricky a écrit :
> First of all, the Web page URL has changed:
>
> http://www.rit.edu/cos/colorscience/rc_munsell_renotation.php
>
> But my main concern is RIT's terms of use. According to these terms,
> the contents of the Web site are for personal, noncommercial use only.
> IANAL, but to me, these terms don't appear to be compatible with the
> LGPL. Do you have some assurance (preferably written) that the Munsell
> data are not covered by these restrictions, or have you otherwise
> contacted RIT about their use?
But aren't 1929 data now in public domain ?
From 1909's law, 1929 would have gain a 28 years protection. Did they
renewed it ? If yes, then the original date for public domain would have
moved from 1985 to 2024.
Yet, the data of 1929 were made from work made before the death of
Munsell (1918). Ergo a work that is now in public domain under USA
federal law (any copyrighted work published before 1923-01-01 is public
domain by effect of the 1976 Act).
And for discussion's sack: as a promoting a system and set of data, did
they even copyrighted these pieces of data ?
Devil's advocate: can we assert that the previous license was not more
permissive ?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Cousin Ricky
Subject: Re: Ping SharkD: legal question about the Munsell module
Date: 19 Dec 2014 14:22:41
Message: <54947b01$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/19/2014 02:35 PM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> But aren't 1929 data now in public domain ?
> From 1909's law, 1929 would have gain a 28 years protection. Did they
> renewed it ? If yes, then the original date for public domain would have
> moved from 1985 to 2024.
Good point.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Mike Horvath
Subject: Re: Ping SharkD: legal question about the Munsell module
Date: 20 Feb 2015 23:12:25
Message: <54e805a9$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/19/2014 12:20 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> First of all, the Web page URL has changed:
>
> http://www.rit.edu/cos/colorscience/rc_munsell_renotation.php
>
> But my main concern is RIT's terms of use. According to these terms,
> the contents of the Web site are for personal, noncommercial use only.
> IANAL, but to me, these terms don't appear to be compatible with the
> LGPL. Do you have some assurance (preferably written) that the Munsell
> data are not covered by these restrictions, or have you otherwise
> contacted RIT about their use?
No, I never thought to ask for permission.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Mike Horvath
Subject: Re: Ping SharkD: legal question about the Munsell module
Date: 23 Nov 2015 14:56:41
Message: <56536f79$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/19/2014 1:35 PM, Le_Forgeron wrote:
> Le 19/12/2014 18:20, Cousin Ricky a écrit :
>> First of all, the Web page URL has changed:
>>
>> http://www.rit.edu/cos/colorscience/rc_munsell_renotation.php
>>
>> But my main concern is RIT's terms of use. According to these terms,
>> the contents of the Web site are for personal, noncommercial use only.
>> IANAL, but to me, these terms don't appear to be compatible with the
>> LGPL. Do you have some assurance (preferably written) that the Munsell
>> data are not covered by these restrictions, or have you otherwise
>> contacted RIT about their use?
>
> But aren't 1929 data now in public domain ?
> From 1909's law, 1929 would have gain a 28 years protection. Did they
> renewed it ? If yes, then the original date for public domain would have
> moved from 1985 to 2024.
Just wanted to add that the "renotations" of the 1929 data are from 1949.
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Mike Horvath
Subject: Re: Ping SharkD: legal question about the Munsell module
Date: 24 Nov 2015 02:19:13
Message: <56540f71$1@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 11/23/2015 2:57 PM, Mike Horvath wrote:
> Just wanted to add that the "renotations" of the 1929 data are from 1949.
>
>
> Mike
>
1943 rather. Anyway, it might be safer to remove the item from the
object collection.
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
From: Mike Horvath
Subject: Re: Ping SharkD: legal question about the Munsell module
Date: 25 Feb 2019 05:27:58
Message: <5c73c32e@news.povray.org>
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 12/19/2014 12:20 PM, Cousin Ricky wrote:
> First of all, the Web page URL has changed:
>
> http://www.rit.edu/cos/colorscience/rc_munsell_renotation.php
>
> But my main concern is RIT's terms of use. According to these terms,
> the contents of the Web site are for personal, noncommercial use only.
> IANAL, but to me, these terms don't appear to be compatible with the
> LGPL. Do you have some assurance (preferably written) that the Munsell
> data are not covered by these restrictions, or have you otherwise
> contacted RIT about their use?
I updated the module.
Anyway, I asked at Wikipedia (where I have uploaded the image) about the
licensing issue, and they said you can't copyright factual/experimental
data. You can copyright the words describing the data, but not the data
itself. Or something like that.
Mike
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
