|
|
Editorial(The Gender Centre advise that this article may not be current and as such certain content, including but not limited to persons, contact details and dates may not apply. Where legal authority or medical related matters are cited, responsibility lies with the reader to obtain the most current relevant legal authority and/or medical publication.) I seem to be taking up quite a bit of Polare space here and there, what with responding to letters and talking about the anti-violence project which is occupying most of my waking hours these days, but hey, that's life in the fast lane. Some of what I have been writing of late has concerned itself with a series of breaches of copyright on our behalf ... breaches which I sincerely regret and would like to forestall for the future. One example was the result of a technical glitch (these newfangled computer programs ... can't trust them the way we used to when we cast the metal and set up the type in forme ... [wheeze, dribble, cackle] ), another was pure inadvertence and the third I cannot answer for, as the material came from one our contributors. It is as a guide to our contributors that I now write: Copyright is property and it is a real property, which can be sold, licensed, given away or leased. It is infinitely divisible. If I write something I can sell it to one buyer to reproduce in black ink and another to reproduce in red; I can sell it to one publisher to use on odd-numbered days and another to use on even; I can sell it to one person to use in Australia and another to use in New Zealand. The point is that if I take someone's work and reproduce it as I think fit, without permission, then I not only break the law but I am also showing disrespect for the creative endeavour of the original author. As a writer myself, I take pride in my work and do not want to see it misused or used without permission. I therefore try to observe both the spirit and the law of copyright. Note, however, that copyright exists only in the "form" of the words. If I reproduce a passage verbatim without permission then I breach copyright. If I re-write the substance of the work in my own words then there is no breach. There is a grey area in between where legal action may be taken if passages of considerable length have been taken verbatim or altered only slightly (plagiarism). Courts and tribunals have difficulty in deciding what constitutes a breach and what doesn't. The case of The Hand That Signed The Paper, which appeared to have reproduced significant parts of other works with very little alteration, springs to mind. The tribunal established to decide whether copyright had been breached was unable to reach a decision although to the lay reader the case may have seemed watertight. I ask that our contributors be conscientious in providing the sources from which they obtain material, if it is not their own creation. Material found on the Internet is not necessarily in the public domain and even if it is, it is good practice to cite the source. Which having been said, please continue to provide material for Polare. We need your opinions and your input. Polare is published in Australia by The Gender Centre Inc. which is funded by the Department of Community Services under the S.A.A.P. Program and supported by the N.S.W. Health Department through the AIDS and Infectious Diseases Branch. Polare provides a forum for discussion and debate on gender issues. Advertisers are advised that all advertising is their responsibility under the Trade Practices Act. Unsolicited contributions are welcome, though no guarantee is made by the Editor that they will be published, nor any discussion entered into. The editor reserves the right to edit such contributions without notification. Any submission which appears in Polare may be published on our internet site. Opinions expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the Editor, The Gender Centre Inc.I, the Department of Community Services or the N.S.W. Department of Health. |
|
  |
||
