Author: Slater Wold
Date: 17:10:23 05/03/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 03, 2002 at 19:36:53, Andrew Williams wrote: >On May 03, 2002 at 17:13:59, Slater Wold wrote: > >>First of all, I want to state that I do NOT support and/or condone the stealing >>of others works for their own good. If you want a good opening book, make your >>own. Jeroen spent a LOT of time perfecting his book, and it IS his work, not >>anyone elses. Don't be lazy. Make your own. >> >>HOWEVER, in every case, there are 2 sides. Each side has their arguement, and >>not always is someone clearly the winner of the arguement. Remember, even the >>most cold-blooded killers get a defense in court, and who wants to defend >>someone who you KNOW is guilty? Neverless, I take legal matters such as Robert >>Hyatt takes math and science. You post a thread that 432423 + 234325 is >>somewhere around 66,000 and Hyatt's going to add them together, and give you an >>ACTUAL figure. That's all I am doing here, giving an ACTUAL figure. >> >> >>The company I work for gives all its employees free legal representation. While >>not all legal procedings are covered, all questions/research over the phone are. >> I called a "company" lawyer a few days ago and presented him with Jeroen's >>problem. This is what he told me: >> >>1.) If Jeroen has *ever* gotten paid 1 penny from Rebel, the books are not his. >> If Ed or Christophe have ever bought him dinner, given him any kind of reward >>and/or compensation, he has NO legal claim to his books. This is a "for-hire" >>copyright, and according to US and International copyright laws, if you are >>compensated for something that recieves and/or is claimed under copyright laws, >>the copyright is not that of the creator, rather the person who paid for the >>work. >> > >I don't believe this. Rebel and Jeroen could come to *any* agreement they are >both happy with, and draw up a contract on that basis. That may mean that the >copyright for the books goes to Rebel, or it may mean that Jeroen retains the >copyright to his books. There's nothing automatic about it: it's based on the >contract that is drawn up. This is certainly true in the UK. I have in front of >me my contract of employment, which states that some things I produce belong to >me, and others belong to my employers. Further, it states: > > "The above sub-clauses [relating to who gets copyright to what] > shall apply except where agreement to the contrary is reached > between the employee and the [employer]." > > >Regards > >Andrew From the United States Copyright Office: Although the general rule is that the person who creates the work is its author, there is an exception to that principle; the exception is a work made for hire, which is a work prepared by an employee within the scope of his or her employment; or a work specially ordered or commissioned in certain specified circumstances. When a work qualifies as a work made for hire, the employer or commissioning party is considered to be the author.
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.