大学体验英语第四册Unit3-Passage A
时间:2018-12-11 作者:英语课 分类:大学体验英语综合教程
10 Big Myths About Copyright
)"If it doesn't have a copyright notice, it's not copyrighted." This was true in the past, but today almost all major nations follow the Berne copyright convention. For example, in the USA, almost everything created privately 1 and originally after April 1, 1989 is copyrighted and protected whether it has a notice or not. The default you should assume for other people's works is that they are copyrighted and may not be copied unless you know otherwise. There are some old works that lost protection without notice, but frankly 2 you should not risk it unless you know for sure.
2) "If I don't charge for it, it's not a violation 3." False. Whether you charge can affect the damages awarded in court, but that's the main difference under the law. It's still a violation if you give it away - and there can still be serious damages if you hurt the commercial value of the property. There is an exception for personal copying of music, which is not a violation, though courts seem to have said that doesn't include wide-scale anonymous 4 personal copying as Napster. If the work has no commercial value, the violation is mostly technical and is unlikely to result in legal action.
3) "If it's posted to Usenet it's in the public domain 5." False. Nothing modern is in the public domain anymore unless the owner explicitly 7 puts it in the public domain. Explicitly, as you have a note from the author/owner saying, "I grant this to the public domain."
4) "My posting was just fair use!" The "fair use" exemption 8 to (U.S.) copyright law was created to allow things such as commentary, parody 9, news reporting, research and education about copyrighted works without the permission of the author. That's important so that copyright law doesn't block your freedom to express your own works. Intent and damage to the commercial value of the work are important considerations. Are you reproducing an article from the New York Times because you couldn't find time to write your own story, or didn't want your readers to have to pay for the New York Times web site? They aren't "fair use". Fair use is usually a short excerpt 10.
5) "If you don't defend your copyright you lose it." - "Somebody has that name copyrighted!" False. Copyright is effectively never lost these days, unless explicitly given away. You also can't "copyright a name" or anything short like that, such as almost all titles. You may be thinking of trademarks 11, which apply to names, and can be weakened or lost if not defended. Like an "Apple" computer. Apple Computer "owns" that word applied 12 to computers, even though it is also an ordinary word. Apple Records owns it when applied to music. Neither owns the word on its own, only in context, and owning a mark doesn't mean complete control.
6)"If I make up my own stories, but base them on another work, my new work belongs to me." False. U.S. Copyright law is quite explicit 6 that the making of what are called "derivative 13 works" - works based on or derived 14 from another copyrighted work - is the exclusive province of the owner of the original work. This is true even though the making of these new works is a highly creative process. If you write a story using settings or characters from somebody else's work, you need that author's permission.
7)"They can't get me, defendants 15 in court have powerful rights!" Copyright law is mostly civil law. If you violate copyright you would not be charged with a crime, but usually get sued.
8) "Oh, so copyright violation isn't a crime or anything?" Actually, recently in the USA commercial copyright
violation involving more than 10 copies and value over $2500 was made a felony. So watch out. On the other hand, this is a fairly new, untested statute 16. In one case an operator of a pirate BBS that didn't charge was acquitted 17 because he didn't charge, but congress amended 18 the law to cover that.
9) "It doesn't hurt anybody - in fact it's free advertising 19." It's up to the owners to decide if they want the free ads or not. If they want them, they will be sure to contact you. Don't rationalize whether it hurts the owners or not, ask them. Usually that's not too hard to do. Even if you can't think of how the author or owner gets hurt, think about the fact that piracy 20 on the net hurts everybody who wants a chance to use this wonderful new technology to do more than read other people's flamewars.
? 10) "They e-mailed me a copy, so I can post it." To have a copy is not to have the copyright. All the E-mail you write is copyrighted. However, E-mail is not unless previously 21 agreed. So you can certainly report on what E-mail you are sent, and reveal what it says. You can even quote parts of it to demonstrate. Frankly, somebody who sues over an ordinary message would almost surely get no damages, because the message has no commercial value, but if you want to stay strictly 22 in the law, you should ask first. On the other hand, don't go nuts if somebody posts E-mail you sent them. If it was an ordinary non-secret personal letter of minimal 23 commercial value with no copyright notice (like 99.9% of all E-mail), you probably won't get any damages if you sue them.
- Some ministers admit privately that unemployment could continue to rise.一些部长私下承认失业率可能继续升高。
- The man privately admits that his motive is profits.那人私下承认他的动机是为了牟利。
- To speak frankly, I don't like the idea at all.老实说,我一点也不赞成这个主意。
- Frankly speaking, I'm not opposed to reform.坦率地说,我不反对改革。
- He roared that was a violation of the rules.他大声说,那是违反规则的。
- He was fined 200 dollars for violation of traffic regulation.他因违反交通规则被罚款200美元。
- Sending anonymous letters is a cowardly act.寄匿名信是懦夫的行为。
- The author wishes to remain anonymous.作者希望姓名不公开。
- This information should be in the public domain.这一消息应该为公众所知。
- This question comes into the domain of philosophy.这一问题属于哲学范畴。
- She was quite explicit about why she left.她对自己离去的原因直言不讳。
- He avoids the explicit answer to us.他避免给我们明确的回答。
- The plan does not explicitly endorse the private ownership of land. 该计划没有明确地支持土地私有制。
- SARA amended section 113 to provide explicitly for a right to contribution. 《最高基金修正与再授权法案》修正了第123条,清楚地规定了分配权。 来自英汉非文学 - 环境法 - 环境法
- You may be able to apply for exemption from local taxes.你可能符合资格申请免除地方税。
- These goods are subject to exemption from tax.这些货物可以免税。
- The parody was just a form of teasing.那个拙劣的模仿只是一种揶揄。
- North Korea looks like a grotesque parody of Mao's centrally controlled China,precisely the sort of system that Beijing has left behind.朝鲜看上去像是毛时代中央集权的中国的怪诞模仿,其体制恰恰是北京方面已经抛弃的。
- This is an excerpt from a novel.这是一部小说的摘录。
- Can you excerpt something from the newspaper? 你能从报纸上选录些东西吗?
- Motrin and Nuprin are trademarks of brands of ibuprofen tablets. Nuprin和Motrin均是布洛芬的商标。 来自《简明英汉词典》
- Many goods in China have the trademarks of a panda. 中国的许多商品都带有熊猫的商标。 来自《简明英汉词典》
- She plans to take a course in applied linguistics.她打算学习应用语言学课程。
- This cream is best applied to the face at night.这种乳霜最好晚上擦脸用。
- His paintings are really quite derivative.他的画实在没有创意。
- Derivative works are far more complicated.派生作品更加复杂。
- Many English words are derived from Latin and Greek. 英语很多词源出于拉丁文和希腊文。 来自《简明英汉词典》
- He derived his enthusiasm for literature from his father. 他对文学的爱好是受他父亲的影响。 来自《简明英汉词典》
- The courts heard that the six defendants had been coerced into making a confession. 法官审判时发现6位被告人曾被迫承认罪行。
- As in courts, the defendants are represented by legal counsel. 与法院相同,被告有辩护律师作为代表。 来自英汉非文学 - 政府文件
- Protection for the consumer is laid down by statute.保障消费者利益已在法令里作了规定。
- The next section will consider this environmental statute in detail.下一部分将详细论述环境法令的问题。
- The jury acquitted him of murder. 陪审团裁决他谋杀罪不成立。
- Five months ago she was acquitted on a shoplifting charge. 五个月前她被宣判未犯入店行窃罪。
- Can you give me any advice on getting into advertising? 你能指点我如何涉足广告业吗?
- The advertising campaign is aimed primarily at young people. 这个广告宣传运动主要是针对年轻人的。
- The government has already adopted effective measures against piracy.政府已采取有效措施惩治盗版行为。
- They made the place a notorious centre of piracy.他们把这地方变成了臭名昭著的海盗中心。
- The bicycle tyre blew out at a previously damaged point.自行车胎在以前损坏过的地方又爆开了。
- Let me digress for a moment and explain what had happened previously.让我岔开一会儿,解释原先发生了什么。