 |
 |
joan unwin wrote: > Sorry, but what precisely is 'public domain'? > Who decides? Is this in reference to James's comment?: > IMHO, the UK cultural heritage "industry" should reject any, covert or otherwise, > efforts to turn "public domain" into "profit centre". Our citizens deserve better and > it would indicate a gross dereliction of duty to those we serve on our part were > we to inhibit the free dissemination of information. If so, there's two answers. There's public domain in the legal sense (used specifically in the US, but more generally to refer to anything on which all copyright protections have expired, or have been waived - http://creativecommons.org/licenses/publicdomain/) There's also the more airy fairy sense of cultural heritage (and objects or works that form part of it) as being something that should be shared freely rather than owned. As to 'who decides', well that's clearly a fairly rhetorical questions, as there's no one entity that decides on both senses of 'public domain' (not even the law courts). However, where there seems to be a conflict is that there's a gap between what the public expects and wants to be 'public domain' (in both senses), and what cultural institutions want to be public domain (and what they are able to make public domain). Which is a problem. Frankie ************************************************** For mcg information and to manage your subscription to the list, visit the website at http://www.museumscomputergroup.org.uk **************************************************