Re: Re: cookbook - another format

[Guest guest]

Marsha: As you know the recipes have been submitted by many individuals. I

doubt they're all original. They're no doubt a mish mash of original, some

adapted for CRON (for example with sucralose substitued for sugar etc), some

taken from other sources. Are you a copyright attorney?

It sounds like Ake's proposed format is perfect for your uses, and probably

for most others use, but we need to hear from others.

on 10/15/2002 8:59 AM, chasiph at empyrean@... wrote:

> -I have two basic questions:

> 1. Who actually owns the Copyright ?

> Are all submitted recipes original? If so, the originator owns the

> copyright and can do whatever they choose.

> Did the recipe originate elsewhere? If so,t then we do not have the

> right to license the recipe as free, especially if the recipe

> originated in a copyrighted or commercial form (for example, book,

> magazine, etc.)

> 2. What is the intended use?

> Do most folks want to use this:

> On line

> Off line but on computer

> Print version

> For my personal use, I'd like a multi-platform capability: online for

> all to see, one that I can have on my laptop, and one I can print &

> take to the kitchen. And, yes, it's very possible with the right

> tool...

>

> Marsha

[Guest guest]

On Tuesday 15 October 2002 14:59, you wrote:

> -I have two basic questions:

> 1. Who actually owns the Copyright ?

> Are all submitted recipes original? If so, the originator owns the

> copyright and can do whatever they choose.

> Did the recipe originate elsewhere? If so,t then we do not have the

> right to license the recipe as free, especially if the recipe

> originated in a copyrighted or commercial form (for example, book,

> magazine, etc.)

You can take the argument one step further: If they originated elsewhere we

probably aren't allowed to publish the recipes at all.

Most recipes will fall into two classes: Original or stolen. If they are in

the latter class we shouldn't publish them at all. If they are in the former

class they can be included in the cookbook if the author gives us permission

to do so. If the author wants to transfer the copyright to the CR Support

Group or keep the copyright but allow use under the " free documentation

license " is basically up to him or her to decide.

I'm not sure at what point a stolen recipe becomes original though.

> 2. What is the intended use?

> Do most folks want to use this:

> On line

> Off line but on computer

> Print version

> For my personal use, I'd like a multi-platform capability: online for

> all to see, one that I can have on my laptop, and one I can print &

> take to the kitchen. And, yes, it's very possible with the right

> tool...

Yes, why not? As I see it though, the important thing at this point is to

collect recipes in some standard format that can be parsed by a computer or

edited by a human for use online, in a book or whatever anyone may want to

use them for.

Under the suggested license, anyone can take the submitted recipes and to

whatever they want with them as long as they remain free and the authors get

due credit. Thus, you can do all the things you suggest above with whatever

your favorite tool may be. That's the good thing with the license.

/ake

[Guest guest]

No, I'm not an attorney, but I am an editor of electronic media... so I'm aware of the copyright implications. I asked because I would hate for a copyright infringement issue to stop the recipe exchange, or result in any legal actions for the owners/moderators... Just concerned.

Marsha

-----Original Message-----From: Francesca Skelton [mailto:fskelton@...]Sent: Tuesday, October 15, 2002 9:09 AM Subject: Re: [ ] Re: cookbook - another formatMarsha: As you know the recipes have been submitted by many individuals. Idoubt they're all original. They're no doubt a mish mash of original, someadapted for CRON (for example with sucralose substitued for sugar etc), sometaken from other sources. Are you a copyright attorney?It sounds like Ake's proposed format is perfect for your uses, and probablyfor most others use, but we need to hear from others.on 10/15/2002 8:59 AM, chasiph at empyrean@... wrote:> -I have two basic questions:> 1. Who actually owns the Copyright ?> Are all submitted recipes original? If so, the originator owns the> copyright and can do whatever they choose.> Did the recipe originate elsewhere? If so,t then we do not have the> right to license the recipe as free, especially if the recipe> originated in a copyrighted or commercial form (for example, book,> magazine, etc.)> 2. What is the intended use?> Do most folks want to use this:> On line> Off line but on computer> Print version> For my personal use, I'd like a multi-platform capability: online for> all to see, one that I can have on my laptop, and one I can print & > take to the kitchen. And, yes, it's very possible with the right> tool...> > Marsha

[Guest guest]

Hello List,

SUMMARY: Concern about proposed GNU Free Documentation License: Could the

recipe originator be irrevocably signing away some of the rights to his/her own

recipe?

=====

Sorry I've been so slow about posting these thoughts. I kept thinking maybe I'd

find time to do more research and thus be able to improve what I say here.

On 2002 Oct 14 Francesca Skelton wrote:

Ake Brannstrom ... has also suggested that we " license " the recipes such as the

with the GNU Free Documentation License. You can read about that particular

license here: http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html

My take on this:

When you originate a recipe, you own all the publication rights to it. You can

publish it, or allow someone else to publish it, either for profit or not for

profit. You can sell the publication rights--piecemeal or in entirety--or

donate them to a worthy cause. Unless you sell or otherwise assign the rights,

you own them for a long time, and you can change your mind years later about

what you want to do with your recipe.

But suppose in year 2002 you accept the GNU license as a sort of governor for

your recipe.

And then suppose in year 2003 you're approached by someone who's compiling a

hard copy cookbook to be sold from bookstore shelves and is asking to use your

recipe--and suppose at that time you like the idea. Maybe you've been offered

modest payment for the recipe, or maybe it seems fun to see your name in print

as originator, or maybe--and this could be the most important reason--maybe you

like the idea of helping spread knowledge of CRON to a different audience, an

audience that might never have looked for your recipe online, or for the CRON

knowledge to go along with it.

Could having agreed in 2002 to the GNU license mean that in 2003 you'd have lost

some of your options?

As Francesca said, the many words of the GNU license are found at

www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html. Section 3 seems to say that the publisher of a

hard copy cookbook would, by including your recipe, lose the right to choose the

words on the book's cover! And the GNU agreement is long and complex enough

that it could create a need for a legal consultation to try to sort the matter

out!

Lynn

P.S. The GNU license was designed for software documentation, which could take

hundreds or thousands of hours to create, which could be worth quite a lot of

money, and which could interest pirates in the opportunity to make a quick

sneaky buck.

[Guest guest]

Suppose this, suppose that. We could all be dead in 2003 (even though we're

trying to live long). With all due respect Lynn, you are not an objective

participant, having made clear your thoughts about publishing a cookbook for

profit.

on 10/23/2002 5:45 PM, Lynn at dayrain@... wrote:

> And then suppose in year 2003 you're approached by someone who's compiling a

> hard copy cookbook to be sold from bookstore shelves and is asking to use your

> recipe--and suppose at that time you like the idea. Maybe you've been offered

> modest payment for the recipe, or maybe it seems fun to see your name in print

> as originator, or maybe--and this could be the most important reason--maybe

> you

> like the idea of helping spread knowledge of CRON to a different audience, an

> audience that might never have looked for your recipe online, or for the CRON

> knowledge to go along with it.

[Guest guest]

Hello list,

This is another message in a thread which IIRC was begun by

Francesca Skelton.

~ ~ ~

In response to my earlier post on the thread this afternoon, on 2002 Oct 23

Francesca Skelton wrote:

" Suppose this, suppose that. We could all be dead in 2003.... ... Lynn, you

are

not an objective participant, having made clear your thoughts about publishing a

cookbook for profit. "

~ ~ ~

Yes, I do feel, as do other CRONies I've communicated with, that a cookbook

could be one of the very best ways of getting information about CRON out to

people who might otherwise not hear about it--or who might only hear media

accounts biased against it. And I am indeed continuing to investigate whether

it's the right project for myself personally and professionally.

How can any of the above detract from the thoughts I've expressed in the message

I sent earlier this afternoon?

I invite readers to consider the merits of those thoughts.

Lynn

P.S. Maybe Francesca was joking, but just in case she wasn't (I'm a little

literal-minded sometimes, a little blind to semi-obscure jokes), I'll say also

that it seems wise to make decisions as though we're *not* all going to be dead

in 2003!

[Guest guest]

Unless you transfer the copyright of the recipe to someone else, this isn't

be a problem. You can always let someone else use the recipe under different

terms. The only thing you can't do in that case is to prevent other people

from using your recipe under the terms in the Free Documentation License. And

if your aim truly is to share your recipe with the world, I don't see what

could be wrong with that.

Ake

> But suppose in year 2002 you accept the GNU license as a sort of governor

> for your recipe.

>

> And then suppose in year 2003 you're approached by someone who's compiling

> a hard copy cookbook to be sold from bookstore shelves and is asking to use

> your recipe--and suppose at that time you like the idea. Maybe you've been

[...]

> Could having agreed in 2002 to the GNU license mean that in 2003 you'd have

> lost some of your options?

[...]

> As Francesca said, the many words of the GNU license are found at

> www.gnu.org/copyleft/fdl.html. Section 3 seems to say that the publisher

> of a hard copy cookbook would, by including your recipe, lose the right to

> choose the words on the book's cover!

[Guest guest]

On 2002 Oct 24, Ake Brannstrom wrote:

Unless you transfer the copyright of the recipe to someone else [you] can always

let someone else use the recipe under different terms. The only thing you can't

do in that case is to prevent other people from using your recipe under the

terms in the Free Documentation License....

Thank you, Ake. The legalese was dense enough that I had stopped trying to

figure it out myself. From your interpretation, the Free Documentation License

certainly does sound like it achieves the desired goals. Before action is taken

to implement the License, I should ask whether it's possible to point out and

elucidate how the various specific passages in the License add up to your

conclusion.

(Not wanting to challenge you in any unpleasant way, but I'm hoping the License

can be understood by non-lawyers, hoping the wording isn't too dense to be

understood.)

Lynn