Re: Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- From: John Cartmell <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 14 May 2007 12:34:33 +0100
In article <gemini.ji12lo002ysay02bg.ray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Ray Dawson <ray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
John Cartmell <john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <4ee2c4b8ccinvalid-email-address@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,[snip]
Paul Vigay <invalid-email-address@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
In article <gemini.ji01tl004c9nf02ds.ray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
Ray Dawson <ray@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I think you might find that Cambridge University Press hold the
rights to the Authorised Version (AV) and not the King James
Version. The texts, although similar, are not the same and I believe
the KJV may actually be in the public domain now. Not 100% sure
about that though. It's certainly freely available - as are a lot of
others - from the e-Sword project. http://www.e-sword.net
The King James version is indeed public domain. It's this version that
my own !Bible application uses.
There seems to be some confusion in this thread and I wouldn't like to
see Paul making a mistake.
See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_James_Version for background andA couple of interesting bits in the Wikipedia article:
contact the Cambridge Universtity Press after removing any confusion
between AV, RSV, and KJV that may have been engendered!
"In most of the world the King James Bible has passed out of copyright and
is freely reproduced. This is not the case in the United Kingdom."
Implies that the KJV text IS in the public domain in the rest of the
world. The assumption being that it's fine to download and use it from a
company or web site based outside of the UK.
I don't see any basis for that assumption.
"The terms of the letters patent prohibit those other than the holders, or
those authorized by the holders from printing, publishing or importing the
Authorized Version into the United Kingdom."
Does downloading from a non-UK web site come under 'importing'? If so, it
does mean that any use in the UK without permission or licence from CUP is
a breach of copyright.
I've always understood that it meant that all internet supply fell foul of the
(UK) law but that the law could only be applied where the web site, or site
owner, or the downloading, was in the UK. I'd certainly assume that
downloading was 'importing' unless advised otherwise by someone who clearly
understood the situation - and such advice may not be easy to obtain!
--
John Cartmell john@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 0845 006 8822 or 0161 969 9820
Qercus magazine FAX +44 (0)8700-519-527 www.finnybank.com
Qercus - the best guide to RISC OS computing
.
- References:
- Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- From: Timothy Hartley
- Re: Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- From: Ray Dawson
- Re: Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- From: Ben Crick
- Re: Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- From: Ray Dawson
- Re: Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- From: John Cartmell
- Re: Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- From: Ray Dawson
- Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- Prev by Date: Re: Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- Next by Date: Re: Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- Previous by thread: Re: Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- Next by thread: Re: Disputes on this and other RISCOS Groups
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|