13th April 2011, 10:23 AM
Quote:
The legality, copyright status, etc are not obvious in a case like this. The data is made up purely of observations which anyone with the equipment and access could get
Ah - but not if you have created you're own algorithms/custom settings on how the information was detected and collected.
Quote:
Which brings up the question: if an archaeologist makes an observation -- whether it be by digging, geophysics, or otherwise -- and someone else has access to the resulting information outside a published source, is it illegal to use it? Is there any way you can protect your observations from misuse, since they're not inherently protected by copyright?
If the access wasn't authorised then there would be a breach of Client confidentiality (?) But I'm pretty certain the information would be covered by Intellectual property right. However, in some cases, you might find that the unit/contractor isn't the sole owner of the copyright/information - it belongs to the client who has contracted the unit to carry out the work.
I think Marcus is right in his interpretation of what Unit is trying to say (just wish he'd do it himself and stop playing around).
However, we do need to re-emphasis the distinction between diggers working for an employer and diggers contracted as freelance/self employed archaeologists.
The act is very clear on this issue of copyright ownership, from Section 11:
(2)Where a literary, dramatic, musical or artistic work [F1, or a film,] is made by an employee in the course of his employment, his employer is the first owner of any copyright in the work subject to any agreement to the contrary
The company does not have to stipulate in the employees terms and conditions the status of copyright ownership.
For freelance/self-employed diggers it would depend on the contract they signed. Now, they can, as could Unitof1, insist on retaining copyright to the records they produce, plans/photos/sections etc and context records if they used their own recording system.
But....how many units would agree to those terms?
One unit I worked for was very clear on this issue with regards illustrations - if the freelance illustrator insisted on retaining copyright and ownership of the artwork they were contracted to produce - we we were told to use someone else.
Oh - and just to throw another spanner in the works - copyright and the physical ownership of the material in question are/can be two separate issues.
To put it simply..if you contract a freelance illustrator to produce a painting reconstructing a scene from the Saxon village you've excavated - you have no right to either copyright or ownership of the finished painting only the right to reproduce an image of the painting - and usually that is for a very specific one-off occaision. All you have paid for is the illustrator's time and skill.
.....unless you have clearly specified and reached an agreement on these issues with the illustrator during contract negotiations.
Quote:
little wonder that many abusers would conclude that the laws in copyright are not worth the paper (or digital media) they are written on....
Hehehe...unless you make the mistake of thinking that of mapping data (I know one one rather large outfit which thought it was too big to have to take notice of a pesky little thing like OS copyright - they learned the hard way)
ShadowJack