[pd-discuss] Monthly virtual meetings on public domain calculators/ public domain works

Wed Jan 13 08:22:30 UTC 2010

Hi Jonathan,

Sorry about that. I've never really worked with a Google spreadsheet before, so was kinda fumbling around in the dark I'm afraid. Thanks for finding a way around the technical mess and setting up the questionnaire! 

Just a couple of observations: 

I'm not sure the examples added to question 7 correspond to the content of the question: these are more relevant to Q. 9 (in which they are also included), which deals with the term of protection and transitional provisions. Q.7 refers to protection for the publisher of previously unpublished works (so, pre-1987 works in Spain do not receive additional protection because they have been published for the first time after the expiry of copyright, but because in Spain the term of protection before the adoption of the Term Directive was longer than the standard set in that Directive). 

Also, I'm not sure mentioning the example of multiple episodes of a television series is helpful in Q. 2. That question was intended (at least from my point of view - others might see this differently?) to set up a distinction between the issue of works in parts, volumes, episodes etc (which is handled in Q.3) and collective works, works of joint authorship etc. (there is a difference between having a single block work that might have multiple authors and having a work with multiple parts, although it is entirely likely that the author might only be one single person) 

Other than that, I think buttons instead of boxes is a good idea - basically it depends on how detailed we want the replies to be. Yes/no replie would actually potentially help with setting up a functional tool, but on the other hand encouraging respondents to give analytical replies with references to their national law also has its advantages...

best!

Christina
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/pd-discuss/attachments/20100113/f386caf7/attachment.html>