Overview of content related to 'web2rights' http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/taxonomy/term/13639/all?article-type=&term=&organisation=&project=&author=charles%20oppenheim&issue= RSS feed with Ariadne content related to specified tag en Book Review: Copyright - Interpreting the Law for Libraries, Archives and Information Services http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue62/oppenheim-rvw <div class="field field-type-text field-field-teaser-article"> <div class="field-items"> <div class="field-item odd"> <p><a href="/issue62/oppenheim-rvw#author1">Charles Oppenheim</a> sees much to like in the new edition of this work by a well-known authority but identifies one potentially major drawback.</p> </div> </div> </div> <p>This is the fifth edition of what is, obviously, a very successful title. The previous edition was published in 2004, and five years is a long time in copyright law and practice, so it was felt no doubt that a new edition was due. However, as I will explain at the end of this review, that decision may have been unsound.</p> <p>The book follows its normal format of a series of questions regarding UK copyright law and practice, with brief answers. The author is a well-known UK copyright expert and has a gentle, witty writing style, which makes it possible to read the book cover-to-cover if you so wanted. The main chapters, covering the basics of copyright, the major media types, licences, electronic copyright and other matters, is followed by lists of useful addresses and sources of information, and a good index [<a href="#1">1</a>].</p> <p>It is always difficult to achieve the magic combination of accuracy and approachability in legal matters, but Cornish largely manages this. I did identify errors and niggles though. For example, question 2.11 [<a href="#1">1</a>] on copyright in facts fails to cross-refer to protection of collections of facts in databases, which is covered elsewhere in the book; the claim in 3.19 and 4.27 that a library, archive or museum when given a bequest of unpublished works can assume that it has also acquired the copyright in such materials unless it is told otherwise is incorrect; in 4.3, the author makes reference to 'trivial works' without explaining what he means by the term; in 4.37 it is claimed that a slide or PowerPoint of a book page made for teaching cannot be made legally, but this is not true, as there could be an argument that the reproduction is for criticism or review, and so is permitted (in any case, the CLA's scanning licence will also often allow this); when discussing the communication to the public right in 4.54, the author fails to note that placing copyright material on an Intranet or as an e-mail attachment is also prohibited; in 6.8, it is claimed that someone who transcribes an interview will own the copyright in the transcription, when in fact the transcriber will jointly own the copyright with the interviewer and interviewee; in 11.64, the author claims it is always an offence to remove or alter rights management information, when in fact it is only an offence when it is done with the intention of enabling or concealing copyright infringement - a very important distinction.</p> <p></p><p><a href="http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue62/oppenheim-rvw" target="_blank">read more</a></p> issue62 review charles oppenheim loughborough university web2rights archives blog cloud computing copyright data database intellectual property intranet licence web 2.0 wiki Sat, 30 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0000 editor 1537 at http://www.ariadne.ac.uk