Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 928 invoked from network); 10 Nov 2008 17:19:10 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 10 Nov 2008 17:19:10 -0000 Received: (qmail 89010 invoked by uid 500); 10 Nov 2008 17:19:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 88792 invoked by uid 500); 10 Nov 2008 17:19:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list legal-discuss@apache.org Received: (qmail 88783 invoked by uid 99); 10 Nov 2008 17:19:15 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:19:15 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [192.220.47.202] (HELO rosenlaw.com) (192.220.47.202) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 10 Nov 2008 17:17:56 +0000 Received: (qmail 48749 invoked by uid 12234); 10 Nov 2008 17:17:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO LROSENTOSHIBA) ([208.106.45.202]) (envelope-sender ) by 192.220.47.202 (qmail-ldap-1.03) with SMTP for ; 10 Nov 2008 17:17:37 -0000 Reply-To: From: "Lawrence Rosen" To: References: Subject: RE: Data Donation Date: Mon, 10 Nov 2008 09:16:13 -0800 Organization: Rosenlaw & Einschlag Message-ID: <91FC1ABDAD2B457BBCCF06223F66B838@LROSENTOSHIBA> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.5579 thread-index: AclDS5ngtU0dGy5rR82GrECw2MGsxgACzWLw In-Reply-To: X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Grant Ingersoll asked: > At any rate, what do others think? Would it be an issue if the ASF > distributed this data? If ASF were to distribute certain blog data ourselves, we would have to take reasonable steps to honor whatever copyrights exist in that data. Do I understand correctly that this is an option that we're *not* interested in pursuing? We shouldn't be concerned about reading anything at all that someone else makes accessible in a public way without restriction. That does not involve our copying and distribution, except peripherally through our individual browsers. That is like reading a book in a library; we don't concern ourselves whether the library itself has honored copyrights. If I'm misunderstanding this offer, please explain. /Larry > -----Original Message----- > From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsingers@apache.org] > Sent: Monday, November 10, 2008 7:46 AM > To: legal-discuss@apache.org > Subject: Data Donation > > Hi, > > I have a contact from a company that distributes blog data who is > willing to donate/provide access to the data without restrictions. > It's about 50 GBs and is of limited commercial value to them, since it > is older data. It, however, useful to us in Lucene. The main concern > I have at this point, that I can't quite get my head, is the notion of > copyright on the data. There are two scenarios, I think: > > 1. They host the data and we merely link to it. > > 2. We host the data and make it available to all. > > In case #1, I don't think there is really an issue w/ copyright, since > people are downloading it themselves, we are just providing a link. > In case #2, it seems a little fuzzier. The company explicitly tells > their customers that it is up to the person downloading to respect the > copyright laws of their jurisdiction. In other words, they are merely > facilitating access. I think the case is similar to the one that > Google makes in terms of their caching of webpages. I don't know if > this argument is just putting their head in the sand or not. I > suppose it would come down to whether or not a blogger would sue over > inclusion of their site in the collection. > > As of now, let's assume the company honors robots.txt when crawling, > if that matters at all in your responses. I don't know if they do or > not, but I would guess they do. > > At any rate, what do others think? Would it be an issue if the ASF > distributed this data? > > -Grant > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational > only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not > constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions > and policies of the ASF. See for > official ASF policies and documents. > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and policies of the ASF. See for official ASF policies and documents. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org