A year ago today on the Virginia Tech campus, a gunman killed people for no apparent rhyme or reason. One of those people who died that day was Jamie Bishop son of the author Michael Bishop. Today I remember Jamie and the others who lost their lives or who had their lived affected by this senseless act.
I may be at the Jeff Smith shindig for the CBLDF tonight if my allergies improve. Right now I feel like I have a bowling ball behind my eyes pressing on them and the front of my skull.
I am taking Caroline to the Library today. She wants to go to the children's section and get some books. We have a good library and good weather and I think we could both do with a walk.
I finally figure out what bothers me the most about the lexicon and it has to do with my academic upraising and everyone who keeps saying that this will screw us on academic study for years if Rowling wins.
This is case does not impact Cliff notes or academic musings on the size of Harry's wand or anything of that nature. This is PLAGIARISM plain and simple. If he handed this into any academic institution, they would not publish it and if this was his master's thesis he would fail and get kicked out of the university with a letter of Reprimand attached to his transcript. This is not a derivative work.
I give you from the US Copyright Office what a derivative work is(bold is my add)
A typical example of a derivative work received for registration in the Copyright Office is one that is primarily a new work but incorporates some previously published material. This previously published material makes the work a derivative work under the copyright law. To be copyrightable, a derivative work must be different enough from the original to be regarded as a "new work" or must contain a substantial amount of new material. Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a preexisting work will not qualify the work as a new version for copyright purposes. The new material must be original and copyrightable in itself. Titles, short phrases, and format, for example, are not copyrightable.
Now moving a few words around and changing an adjective doth not a new work make. A few entries that are expansions upon ideas doth not make up for the mammoth amount of material that is plagiarized.
I have this nagging pain in my shoulder which seems to not be getting worse but it is not getting any better. I think it is adding to my cranky level today. I am at yellow heading for orange. But I will suck it up and just do what I need to do for home, hearth and harmony.
I am grateful for all the people I am going to see over the next week.
I may be at the Jeff Smith shindig for the CBLDF tonight if my allergies improve. Right now I feel like I have a bowling ball behind my eyes pressing on them and the front of my skull.
I am taking Caroline to the Library today. She wants to go to the children's section and get some books. We have a good library and good weather and I think we could both do with a walk.
I finally figure out what bothers me the most about the lexicon and it has to do with my academic upraising and everyone who keeps saying that this will screw us on academic study for years if Rowling wins.
This is case does not impact Cliff notes or academic musings on the size of Harry's wand or anything of that nature. This is PLAGIARISM plain and simple. If he handed this into any academic institution, they would not publish it and if this was his master's thesis he would fail and get kicked out of the university with a letter of Reprimand attached to his transcript. This is not a derivative work.
I give you from the US Copyright Office what a derivative work is(bold is my add)
A typical example of a derivative work received for registration in the Copyright Office is one that is primarily a new work but incorporates some previously published material. This previously published material makes the work a derivative work under the copyright law. To be copyrightable, a derivative work must be different enough from the original to be regarded as a "new work" or must contain a substantial amount of new material. Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a preexisting work will not qualify the work as a new version for copyright purposes. The new material must be original and copyrightable in itself. Titles, short phrases, and format, for example, are not copyrightable.
Now moving a few words around and changing an adjective doth not a new work make. A few entries that are expansions upon ideas doth not make up for the mammoth amount of material that is plagiarized.
I have this nagging pain in my shoulder which seems to not be getting worse but it is not getting any better. I think it is adding to my cranky level today. I am at yellow heading for orange. But I will suck it up and just do what I need to do for home, hearth and harmony.
I am grateful for all the people I am going to see over the next week.