On Thu, May 05, 2005 at 04:49:24PM -0500, Robert Shimmin wrote:
We actually have a draft rule to apply for such orphaned works, but it is not in place yet because we have not received sufficient legal guidance for me to feel comfortable applying it (in case you didn't already know this, as CEO my main most important role, though not usually one that takes the most of my time, is to manage PGLAF's risk. The majority of our risk comes from decisions we make about the copyright status of works we distribute).
Is the delay because you have insufficient legal advice as to whether PGLAF is indeed a "library or archive," insufficient advice as to whether web distribution is one of the exempt activities in 108(h), or insufficient advice as to whether the "reasonable price" tests mentioned in the draft policy are duly diligent.
-- RS
All of the above, to some extent. When PG makes decisions about copyright, we do so using guidance received from our volunteer legal advisors. That is, lawyers -- including people like law school professors, law librarians and specialists in intellectual property issues. There have been over 1/2 dozen such advisors over the years, and numerous people who have contributed to individual efforts. The outcomes are evident in our license/header, as well as our copyright rules -- both of which have evolved quite a bit since the first versions in the early 1990s. Since our lawyers are volunteers, it's sometimes hard to get them to respond. It's doubly hard when issues are vague, as with the 108(h) exemptions. I hope that the LoC ruling will provide guidance we can follow, and that it results in "freeing" many orphaned works. -- Greg