Using others' work on Ambuda

[Arun Prasad]

(This issue came up on Discord, but I'm writing my answer here for a bit more permanence.)

As Ambuda grows, we'll constantly face the issue of how we should use resources curated by other projects, especially when it comes to digtiizations and recordings. My view is that we should use these resources only with permission, and below I'll explain why I think this way.

To me, this issue has two components: a legal one and an ethical one.

Legally, my understanding is that if some work is in the public domain, mere transcription of it is generally not copyrightable. I think this principle generally holds for all ancient literature, through critical editions are more of a gray area. Further, deliberate attempts to claim copyright on public domain works would be considered copyfraud in several jurisdictions.

If this is true, then there is no problem on purely legal grounds if we use resources that are in the public domain, even if their curators claim otherwise.

So, why not go ahead?

The issue is that if Ambuda is sued -- even if frivolously -- then it could massively derail the project. Ambuda is not a hobby project: it is aiming for serious public influence, it receives donations as part of its ongoing work, and it might partner with universities and governments in the future.

So, the legal consequences of misuse are potentially much greater. And currently, we don't have any legal structure in place, such as a 501(c)(3), to protect the project.

Ethically, the main question is whether we want risk to hurting and offending others for the sake of our mission to make Sanskrit literature radically accessible.

Ambuda is an ambitious and transformative project, and ambitious and transformative projects will naturally change the status quo and risk hurting others. Such is the price for any serious change.

My ambition for Ambuda is that ten years from now, everyone on the planet with an interest in Sanskrit knows and uses our work. For that to happen, Ambuda needs to be seen as credible and trustworthy. And for Ambuda to be seen as credible and trustworthy, I think we must follow a high ethical standard that our readership as a whole will understand and accept.

My personal view is that we should avoid hurting the feelings of others. But more pragmatically, I am worried about the following negative consequences for the project if we take resources without permission:

- Other projects will be more wary of us and less willing to collaborate.

- We will lose connections and opportunities due to a bad reputation.

- We might receive negative press and damage our credibility among our readers.

- We might cause further divisions in the Sanskrit community.

So I see unauthorized use of resources as a method of last resort that we should use only if there is no alternative

~

Given the above, here's the policy I've tended to follow:

1. If the work has an explicit license, follow the license and make the data source clear.

2. If the license is unclear, make a reasonable attempt to ask for permission.

  a. If permission is granted, great!

  b. If permission is denied, find another route.

  c. If there's no response, make a judgment call.

~

I'm convinced that this is the right approach for Ambuda, but I'm always open to hearing out dissenting views and changing course.

Arun

[Ashwin Ramaswami]

> "my understanding is that if some work is in the public domain, mere transcription of it is generally not copyrightable. I think this principle generally holds for all ancient literature, through critical editions are more of a gray area."

I broadly agree with this. However, while a "transcription of a manuscript in the public domain" would be public domain, some works are based on multiple manuscripts -- which could potentially count as a "critical edition" that is copyrightable. Some works may not even mention this fact / which manuscript(s) they are from. How do we account for this when we don't know which manuscript(s) a published work is taken from?

[omshiva...@gmail.com]

In such cases we have to reach out to the editor of such work. In Creative Commons terms we call it remix. If the work is licensed it’s easy to understand the allowed reuse. Otherwise it calls for a dialogue. 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "ambuda-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to ambuda-discus...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/ambuda-discuss/cde84553-4c93-4dc7-8cb6-c4d952ef1a5cn%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--

Sent from Gmail Mobile