Jump to content

Menu

Annoyed with copyright


Recommended Posts

Er....maybe you guys could go back to discussing copyright now.

 

In answer to previous posts, SWB thinks that people who copy and then resell probably don't make a living through selling intellectual property.

 

SWB thinks that those people are NOT copying physical objects, like art, kitchen appliances, candles, armchairs, etc., and then reselling the original physical objects, simply because the technology is not yet available.

 

SWB wonders if, should that technology become available, those people would rethink their position.

 

SWB also has no intention of tasking her publishing company with tracking down copyright violators, because we have better things to do--like publishing new materials. But she also wishes that those who make their living from intellectual property were taken more seriously as copyright holders.

 

SWB finds writing in the third person strangely exhausting and now will return to finish WWE Workbook 4, which she hopes no one will copy and then resell, as it's taking her untold hours of productive work time, which will not be compensated until AFTER authorized copies of the book are sold to consumers.

 

SWB

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 272
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

In answer to previous posts, SWB thinks that ....

 

SWB thinks that ...

 

SWB wonders if, ....

 

SWB also has no intention of ....

 

SWB finds writing in the third person strangely exhausting and now will return to finish WWE Workbook 4, which she hopes no one will copy and then resell, as it's taking her untold hours of productive work time, which will not be compensated until AFTER authorized copies of the book are sold to consumers.

 

SWB

 

The Borg....er, Board....find SWB's comments to be satisfyingly to the point and have decided that she Will Be Assimilated.

Resistance is Futile.

 

:D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This board isn't going to let you wiggle out of being a snot.

Since you were the one who brought up your other post, then this board is going to examine it fully.

 

I hadn't realized you were working for PHP, Peek. :001_smile:

 

Lots of people use formatting to make certain points. Yours just happened to point out how snotty YOU were about people making a buck off used curriculum.

 

You're only a snob when you snub other people. You were making other people feel like crap because they were selling their used curriculum instead of donating it.

 

Thank you for letting me know that I have the power making someone feel like crap (or anything else). I wonder what other super powers I have; seeing as I was always taught that everyone is responsible for their own feelings.

 

Your post was ABOUT the used book market.

 

No, it wasn't. Read it again.

 

You don't have to define curriculum.

You do have to realize that text books and workbooks are different types OF curriculum: one is consumable and one is NOT.

 

Selling used curriculum is not unethical or illegal.

Even selling a workbook that has been written in is not unethical or illegal.

Donating used curriculum is not unethical or illegal.

 

Hmm. So if someone other than asta donates used curriculum, it is okay, but if asta donates curriculum, she is a snob with a snotty attitude.

 

And I think it has been well established on this thread that selling used curriculum is quite often breaking copyright law.

 

Making copies of stuff IS --BIG difference.

 

Are you telling us that you have no comprehension in the difference between selling a used teacher guide vs making copies of a consumable workbook??

 

So here is a question then: If a person is buying a consumable workbook with the intent to use its contents, but not write in it, is it not consumed? I believe there was an earlier post about this. Where does one draw the line: at a photocopy, or at the use of the material in its original form, but hand copied? Is it alright to break a copyright by essentially hand copying the entire work versus photocopying it on a machine?

 

Honest questions. I really do wonder how many small companies in the HS publishing market stay in business.

 

 

a

 

 

(cross posted with SWB)

Edited by asta
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So here is a question then: If a person is buying a consumable workbook with the intent to use its contents, but not write in it, is it not consumed? I believe there was an earlier post about this. Where does one draw the line: at a photocopy, or at the use of the material in its original form, but hand copied? Is it alright to break a copyright by essentially hand copying the entire work versus photocopying it on a machine?

 

Good question. This was alluded to earlier. I think that hand copying the materials should ethically count as consumption (with reference to consumables). I think that some are making a distinction between photocopying and hand copying or just answering on paper. Maybe there is a legal distinction between the two scenarios. It seems to me that if you are using and benefiting from the consumable text, whether you run photocopies or not, you should not resell it.

 

I think the ethical course of action, when in doubt, would be to simply contact the publisher and ask if they mind if you use the curriculum in this way. It feels like the right thing to do. What is legal and what is right, of course, are not always synonymous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Good question. This was alluded to earlier. I think that hand copying the materials should ethically count as consumption (with reference to consumables). I think that some are making a distinction between photocopying and hand copying or just answering on paper. Maybe there is a legal distinction between the two scenarios. It seems to me that if you are using and benefiting from the consumable text, whether you run photocopies or not, you should not resell it.

 

I think the ethical course of action, when in doubt, would be to simply contact the publisher and ask if they mind if you use the curriculum in this way. It feels like the right thing to do. What is legal and what is right, of course, are not always synonymous.

 

The permission is given (rewrite and answer on paper) when the problems states, "Work this problem...how many?...which one...or rewrite and correct this sentence."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

And I think it has been well established on this thread that selling used curriculum is quite often breaking copyright law.

 

 

I don't think that's been established at all. Buying a workbook, making a copy, using the copy, then selling the original is breaking copyright law. There are many non-consumable curricula out there that would be perfectly legal to sell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Er....maybe you guys could go back to discussing copyright now.

 

In answer to previous posts, SWB thinks that people who copy and then resell probably don't make a living through selling intellectual property.

 

SWB thinks that those people are NOT copying physical objects, like art, kitchen appliances, candles, armchairs, etc., and then reselling the original physical objects, simply because the technology is not yet available.

 

SWB wonders if, should that technology become available, those people would rethink their position.

 

SWB also has no intention of tasking her publishing company with tracking down copyright violators, because we have better things to do--like publishing new materials. But she also wishes that those who make their living from intellectual property were taken more seriously as copyright holders.

 

SWB finds writing in the third person strangely exhausting and now will return to finish WWE Workbook 4, which she hopes no one will copy and then resell, as it's taking her untold hours of productive work time, which will not be compensated until AFTER authorized copies of the book are sold to consumers.

 

SWB

:iagree: (now that I know what my opinion should be)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm so impressed with the civility of this thread. I was vilified when I brought up a similar concept.

 

(not copyright per se, but the overarching concept of buying w/ intent to sell)

 

 

a

 

When we post threads, one must assume that some posters will agree and some may disagree. It obviously hit a nerve when some posters disagreed with your opinion. However, it does not help if you resurrect the dead. Let bygones be bygones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just out of curiosity, how does this work for schools? They often don't allow the children to write in the workbooks. They reuse them year after year. Then when they are done, they sell them.

 

Maybe that is an agreement they make with the publisher?

 

I've been quite pleased that at my children's school, they do write in the workbooks. When the items are copied pages, they are from books where it clearly says on the bottom of each page what can and cannot be reproduced or from websites to which the textbook publisher provides access. Also many teacher's editions have additional books that the schools pay a great deal for because they include permission to copy. Of course for textbooks that are designed to be used by multiple children, the exercises are meant to be transferred to the student's piece of paper. This has been my experience in a specific school district and probably cannot be generalized to all schools. Many teachers and educators would benefit from the lengthy copyright discussion in which we have engaged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What about donating curricula to something like Book Samaritan?

 

Does it violate copyright to donate text books? Probably not.

 

How about Teacher Guides like Singapore HIG's/Shurley Manuals/VP/MP, etc? Probably not?

 

How about Instructor Guides from Sonlight/Winter Promise/MFW/PHP? No?

 

How about Lapbook cd's from Knowledge Box or Hands of a Child?

 

Or CD's like HTTA's Timeline figures or Time Travelers?

 

Is it "technically" a copyright infringement, but that's ok, we can fudge a little donating to Book Samaritan because they're going to very needy families?

 

What about reselling all those? Is it "technically" a copyright infringement to buy, use and resell CD's, but that's ok because, well, I just can't bring myself to throw them out?

I think I know what the answer is, but the temptation to save a few dollars is great.

 

yvonne

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have a problem with it. I hate if that sounds.....mercenary...but I spend ALOT of money of books and resources. I don't sell them...ever only because I have a HUGE family and will use them more than once but for the parent who spends alot and will only use it once....it's not an issure for me. They spent their money on it, it belongs to them. They bought the material...they should be able to do what they want.

 

I see alot of homeschool material being sold used at conventions, booksales, garage sales or wherever...I am glad the parents can get htier money back out of it.

 

I do copy and reuse the books over and over again, I just can't be buying the same books over and over again if I don't have too..it just seems so.....wasteful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hadn't realized you were working for PHP, Peek. :001_smile:

LOL! I'm pretty sure that 99% of the posters on the Board don't work for PHP ;)

 

 

Thank you for letting me know that I have the power making someone feel like crap (or anything else). I wonder what other super powers I have; seeing as I was always taught that everyone is responsible for their own feelings.

 

It's called courtesy.

ok, so you missed that memo. Consider yourself informed. But since you aren't interested in that based on how you were taught, I'll play it your way:

if you feel "vilified" then maybe you need to put on your big girl panties, stop whining, and take responsibility for it instead of blaming it on this uncivilized board.

 

 

No, it wasn't. Read it again.

 

I read it:

 

Frankly, I am a bit stunned by the number of people who purchase things with the intent of reselling them

what do you think RESELLING means?? hello?!? That's DIRECTLY addressing the used book market, lol! How in the world were you NOT talking about the used book market in a post that complains about people REselling books? or in simpler terms: selling books that have been USED?

 

Hmm. So if someone other than asta donates used curriculum, it is okay, but if asta donates curriculum, she is a snob with a snotty attitude.

 

NO-- if asta figures out that perfectly wonderful people can resell used curriculum OR donate it, then she can drop the snob label.

You can donate all you want, just as people can sell all they want.

If asta continues to snottily assert that people who resell used curriculum are chintzy cheap people out to screw the publishers, feel free to embrace the snob label. But since you are taking responsibility for your feelings, i won't lose any sleep over how you happen to feel about the snob label.

 

you seem to be enjoying the victim game a lot, so we'll just watch you keep whining.

 

cheese?

 

And I think it has been well established on this thread that selling used curriculum is quite often breaking copyright law.

 

"quite often"?? you are still stuck in a mode of not being able to tell a consumable workbook from a non-consumable teacher guide or text. Would you like to make a guess at how much of the used curriculum market is WORKBOOKS? go count: it's not that much. It looks like someone else already pointed out that your statement is false, so...moving on:

 

So here is a question then: If a person is buying a consumable workbook with the intent to use its contents, but not write in it, is it not consumed? I believe there was an earlier post about this. Where does one draw the line: at a photocopy, or at the use of the material in its original form, but hand copied? Is it alright to break a copyright by essentially hand copying the entire work versus photocopying it on a machine?

 

NOW we're getting to the meat of the thread, and why your post was so very different from this one.

personally, i think it IS breaking copyright to hand copy or use the wkbk as a source and write answers elsewhere/on page protectors, whatnot; but I don't necessarily consider legality as on par w/ ethics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

QUOTE=yvonne;1022643

What about donating curricula to something like Book Samaritan?

 

Me: consumable stuff that's been copied somehow or nonconsumable stuff that's not under some implied contract?

 

Does it violate copyright to donate text books? Probably not.

 

Me: I agree --probably not.

 

How about Teacher Guides like Singapore HIG's/Shurley Manuals/VP/MP, etc? Probably not?

Probably not --especially if they aren't workbooky type consumables. read the individual copyrights on the front cover.

 

How about Instructor Guides from Sonlight/Winter Promise/MFW/PHP? No?

Are they workbooky? what does the copyright say?

 

How about Lapbook cd's from Knowledge Box or Hands of a Child?

Or CD's like HTTA's Timeline figures or Time Travelers?

 

 

Probably not. I'd say most likely not. Depends on the publisher.

 

Is it "technically" a copyright infringement, but that's ok, we can fudge a little donating to Book Samaritan because they're going to very needy families?

 

Is it "technically" a copyright infringement to buy, use and resell CD's, but that's ok because, well, I just can't bring myself to throw them out?

I think I know what the answer is, but the temptation to save a few dollars is great.

 

For stuff that has a specific use copyright or workbooks? Not technically --just IS. Some decide to ignore the law to help a needy family. They decide it is more unethical to add to the pollution of the planet or more unethical to NOT help a family than it is to obey copyright law. That's called civil disobedience. Our country has a long history of doing that. ;)

 

What about reselling all those?

same as donating: any method that gets it from your hands into another person's hands is "guilty" of depriving a publisher of a sale. But that's not necessarily the same --or protected in the same way-- as copyright.

 

but I'm certainly no expert :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread made me really examine my own actions.

 

I sometimes get audio books from the library and download them to my computer to listen from my iPod. I don't sell this...but I do have a personal copy. Is this copyright infringement? I'm thinking so.

 

Thank you for addressing this topic.

 

Janell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

same as donating: any method that gets it from your hands into another person's hands is "guilty" of depriving a publisher of a sale. But that's not necessarily the same --or protected in the same way-- as copyright.

 

 

Of course the assumption made is that someone buying something used would otherwise buy a new copy. I think that a faulty assumption myself and generally the used market doesn't deprive the publisher of very many new sales.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is the conclusion of this thread that selling any used medium that could be copied illegal? I feel like a lot of posts in this thread are just opinions, not statements of actual law. So, I did some digging and I found this, which refers to the actual law. You can sell used books and use books from a library legally.

 

http://www.copyright.com/ccc/viewPage.do?pageCode=cr10-n#saledoctrine

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread made me really examine my own actions.

 

I sometimes get audio books from the library and download them to my computer to listen from my iPod. I don't sell this...but I do have a personal copy. Is this copyright infringement? I'm thinking so.

 

Thank you for addressing this topic.

 

Janell

 

Yes, I think it is a copyright infringement. By downloading the audio book, you have just gotten a copy to keep for free. The library paid for the audio book it loans out. You did not pay for the copy you made. So unless it's a public domain book it's a copyright violation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

How about Instructor Guides from Sonlight/Winter Promise/MFW/PHP? No?

Are they workbooky? what does the copyright say?

 

:)

This depends on the company. Winterpromise does not want their instructor guides or exclusives resold. They this clear on their website. It is also a reason why some families wil not buy their very expensive products. Edited by Dobela
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This thread made me really examine my own actions.

 

I sometimes get audio books from the library and download them to my computer to listen from my iPod. I don't sell this...but I do have a personal copy. Is this copyright infringement? I'm thinking so.

 

Thank you for addressing this topic.

 

Janell

 

Yes, that is copyright infringement. Downloading a CD to your ipod so you can listen to it while running is one thing -- as long as you delete it when you return the CD to the library.

 

When you return the CD, you must not have any copy of it.

 

Our library offers downloadable audio books (a few of them). You get the license for three weeks. After three weeks, the item stops playing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So is the conclusion of this thread that selling any used medium that could be copied illegal? I feel like a lot of posts in this thread are just opinions, not statements of actual law. So, I did some digging and I found this, which refers to the actual law. You can sell used books and use books from a library legally.

 

http://www.copyright.com/ccc/viewPage.do?pageCode=cr10-n#saledoctrine

From that website,it clearly states that once someone buys a physical copy of a copyrighted work, the person can then resell it or lend it as they so chose. That means yes, you can resell those teacher reproducible books in their original form.

 

It also states that you can reproduce some types of media for "spontaneous" reasons. Their example was copying an article from today's newpaper for today's lesson.

 

Libraries have their own section to copyright law. Essentially they are the one from above that lends the copy they have purchased. It is very clear (to me) that one is not to copy entire volumes of anything, unless the copyright gives permission for that. You are also not allowed to resell your copy of such works.

 

So, back to buying workbooks and copying them. You can resell the original if you chose. You can buy an original on the resale market if you chose. It is the copying of them that is illegal if the publisher/author doesn't give permission for this-even if you don't resell the original. To me that is very clear and easy to understand.

Edited by Dobela
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, back to buying workbooks and copying them. You can resell the original if you chose. You can buy an original on the resale market if you chose. It is the copying of them that is illegal if the publisher/author doesn't give permission for this-even if you don't resell the original. To me that is very clear and easy to understand.

 

right --selling the original material [from which you made copies] is not illegal.

 

It is the ACT OF COPYING that is illegal.

 

I agree that this seems like a pretty simple concept.

 

Selling material that you have illegally copied may be deemed unethical by some people's standards.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course the assumption made is that someone buying something used would otherwise buy a new copy. I think that a faulty assumption myself and generally the used market doesn't deprive the publisher of very many new sales.

 

 

I agree.

In fact, the used book market may ironically be justified as free advertising: people that WOULD NOT have paid retail for the product [so no "lost sale"] are using it and reviewing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

What about e-books? If I buy an e-book IG and print it out for my own use, can I sell the printed book (If I get rid of the file?) Can I send the file and/or the printed book to someone else as long as I don't keep a copy?
Does anyone know this answer to this? Do e-books have different rules?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

After looking further into it, I think any publisher that says you can't resell a product that you have bought violates the first-sale doctrine. A copyright means you just own the content, but the buyer owns the medium, such as a book or CD, and is free to do anything with it as long as it doesn't violate the copyright, such as copying and then reselling. Now electronic media is different, such as in downloads of ebooks, because the it depends on the user agreement. This could apply to Kindle products also. If you read the fine print with software, software involves licensing, which is different from owning a book outright. Calvert explicitly says you are leasing the books and that is fine. It is clear. If Winter Promise says you are leasing or licensing the book, you can't resell it. But if you bought the book and own it, you can sell it. They can say you can't sell it, but it doesn't mean it's legal. You can only control a product so much after you sell it. The law is clear. It's called the first-sale doctrine. This is what lets libraries be legal.

 

The thing that bothers me about this thread is that people are stating opinions about what is legal and not legal. Read the laws. Read the fine print before you buy a product. Also, what a company says you can do or can't do with a product may not be upheld legally anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After looking further into it, I think any publisher that says you can't resell a product that you have bought violates the first-sale doctrine. A copyright means you just own the content, but the buyer owns the medium, such as a book or CD, and is free to do anything with it as long as it doesn't violate the copyright, such as copying and then reselling. Now electronic media is different, such as in downloads of ebooks, because the it depends on the user agreement. This could apply to Kindle products also. If you read the fine print with software, software involves licensing, which is different from owning a book outright. Calvert explicitly says you are leasing the books and that is fine. It is clear. If Winter Promise says you are leasing or licensing the book, you can't resell it. But if you bought the book and own it, you can sell it. They can say you can't sell it, but it doesn't mean it's legal. You can only control a product so much after you sell it. The law is clear. It's called the first-sale doctrine. This is what lets libraries be legal.

 

The thing that bothers me about this thread is that people are stating opinions about what is legal and not legal. Read the laws. Read the fine print before you buy a product. Also, what a company says you can do or can't do with a product may not be upheld legally anyway.

 

I agree that there is much in opinion being thrown around about selling a product after one has illegally copied it. I'm not seeing where Calvert "explicitly" says you can't resell their stuff, even tho I have seen it in the book itself on the copyright page. Not sure how one can read the fine print BEFORE buying a product if it is not made clear before the purchase [as some posters have claimed].

 

The part that is not in dispute is whether one can COPY [completely] a product before selling it. That is a plain reading of the law and easily upheld by a court.

 

The original post was a stated opinion reacting to people who might freely admit they copied a workbook so they could resell it. Of course there's a lot of opinion involved --the discussion itself wasn't necessarily only about copyright law. ;) In fact, she used words like annoyed, honor, and explicitly asked for...opinion.

 

What this thread HAS established is that just because something is stated, doesn't mean it is legal.

And just because something is legal, doesn't mean it is ethical.

And just because something is illegal, doesn't mean it is UNethical.

 

Libraries have some very specific sections of copyright law that gives them lots of legal room that isn't available to the typical individual consumer. Scroll down on that page you linked and read section 108 about libraries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peek, Calvert's policy is on their website, in their catalog, and now they read it to you if you order over the phone. If you order online, you have to acknowledge the policy before you can buy it. It might have been less obvious in the past, but it isn't now!

 

since I haven't placed an order, I hadn't seen it on the website. :)

I would certainly hope it was explicit, but waiting till you are ready to place the order after doing lots of reading and research doesn't seem very...courteous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From that website,it clearly states that once someone buys a physical copy of a copyrighted work, the person can then resell it or lend it as they so chose. That means yes, you can resell those teacher reproducible books in their original form.

 

It also states that you can reproduce some types of media for "spontaneous" reasons. Their example was copying an article from today's newpaper for today's lesson.

 

Libraries have their own section to copyright law. Essentially they are the one from above that lends the copy they have purchased. It is very clear (to me) that one is not to copy entire volumes of anything, unless the copyright gives permission for that. You are also not allowed to resell your copy of such works.

 

So, back to buying workbooks and copying them. You can resell the original if you chose. You can buy an original on the resale market if you chose. It is the copying of them that is illegal if the publisher/author doesn't give permission for this-even if you don't resell the original. To me that is very clear and easy to understand.

 

I understand that copying and reselling or just copying is illegal. My posts weren't referring to copying. I'm more interested in the issue of just reselling something that you owned and didn't copy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree that there is much in opinion being thrown around about selling a product after one has illegally copied it. I'm not seeing where Calvert "explicitly" says you can't resell their stuff, even tho I have seen it in the book itself on the copyright page. Not sure how one can read the fine print BEFORE buying a product if it is not made clear before the purchase [as some posters have claimed].

 

The part that is not in dispute is whether one can COPY [completely] a product before selling it. That is a plain reading of the law and easily upheld by a court.

 

The original post was a stated opinion reacting to people who might freely admit they copied a workbook so they could resell it. Of course there's a lot of opinion involved --the discussion itself wasn't necessarily only about copyright law. ;) In fact, she used words like annoyed, honor, and explicitly asked for...opinion.

 

What this thread HAS established is that just because something is stated, doesn't mean it is legal.

And just because something is legal, doesn't mean it is ethical.

And just because something is illegal, doesn't mean it is UNethical.

 

Libraries have some very specific sections of copyright law that gives them lots of legal room that isn't available to the typical individual consumer. Scroll down on that page you linked and read section 108 about libraries.

 

I don't dispute the copying issue here. It's the reselling issue when you have honored the copyright laws. Some are saying that you shouldn't resell books. Unless it is licensed and leased, it is legal and ethical. Otherwise, let's just extend the whole reselling thing to everything that we buy. The copyright doesn't extend to what someone can do with the book. But maybe I'm taking the whole issue too seriously. :lol: I'm avoiding my work today and I have deadlines to meet. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Under the tab "textbook exchange":

 

Recognizing our families' desire to save money and to recycle textbooks, we created convenient book exchange for new or past Calvert families. Our Textbook Exchange allows our families to buy and sell textbooks necessary to make a Calvert re-use complete. Only textbooks used in the Calvert courses offered in this catalog can be bought and sold on the site. We do not charge any commissions or fees.

Calvert Lesson Manuals may not be sold. Calvert School accepts no responsibility for the materials, terms, prices, or negotiations between Calvert families.

To fully understand whether our Textbook Exchange will benefit you, please review our Re-use course section.

 

...

 

Under the tab "Re-Use Courses" (in the curriculum section):

 

Our re-use courses allow families with multiple students to re-use textbooks from previous years, while receiving new Lesson Manuals, consumable materials, and academic support.

Enrolled families can take advantage of this cost-saving program by purchasing used textbooks for our grade level courses from friends or the textbook exchange.

Checklists for the books required to complete a Re-Use course appear to the right on this page. Please review the checklist for the grade you are interested in. You are responsible for making sure you have all of the items listed on the re-use checklist.

 

For select enrichment offerings, we offer Additional Student Kits, which address the needs of families who would like to use the course with more than one student at a time. These kits are only available to families who have previously enrolled or are in the process of enrolling in the full enrichment course. This cost-saving option provides the additional child all the consumable materials needed to have the full academic experience.

For additional information, see our Re-Use Policy.

 

...

 

Calvert School recognizes that families want to save money and recycle course materials wherever possible, and to assist in these efforts, we provide Re-Use Courses. When a family enrolls in a Re-Use Course, they must obtain the textbooks from another source. We have provided checklists, by grade, for the books required to complete a Re-Use Course. Possible sources for these textbooks might include our Textbook Exchange, publishers' website, family, friends, other homeschoolers, or other curriculum websites.

 

Calvert School is not a book seller; we are providers of a complete homeschool curriculum. As such, we cannot sell you individual books to complete re-use courses. Our Textbook Exchange is where families can buy and sell Calvert course textbooks to complete their re-use courses and to recycle textbooks. We do not charge commissions or fees on items sold on our Textbook Exchange.

 

Please note that when families enroll their children in Calvert School, they agree to the terms that the Lesson Manual is leased for use for teaching the enrolled student only. The Lesson Manual at all times remains the copyrighted property of Calvert School. Therefore, you agree at enrollment not to SELL, SHARE, GIVE-WAY, DUPLICATE or DISTRIBUTE the Lesson Manual. You are free to do what you wish with the textbooks and workbooks you obtain from Calvert School.

 

If you have questions about our re-use policy, contact our Client Services Representatives ....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Calvert does not send contracts to be signed. I never have returned my signature on a piece of paper to Calvert. There is NO contract, other than something in their heads. That came out smart-alecky, and not as I meant it. There just is nothing concrete about their request/expectation/requirement. Legally, I suppose it is some sort of spider-webby-flimsy "verbal contract." (except that never have I "affirmed" anything in response to the company!) . . . It just is a weird scenario !

 

 

Direct from Calvert's website. Please see the link at the bottom if you wish to read it in context.

 

Please note that when families enroll their children in Calvert School, they agree to the terms that the Lesson Manual is leased for use for teaching the enrolled student only. The Lesson Manual at all times remains the copyrighted property of Calvert School. Therefore, you agree at enrollment not to SELL, SHARE, GIVE-WAY, DUPLICATE or DISTRIBUTE the Lesson Manual. You are free to do what you wish with the textbooks and workbooks you obtain from Calvert School.

 

http://www.calvertschool.org/accredited-homeschool-curriculum/re-use-courses/re-use-policy/

 

Once again, if you do not agree to these terms, do not enroll.

 

(Sorry if someone already addressed this... I have not read the last few pages yet.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you have the threads confused --nobody in this thread is saying that. You might want to check asta's thread that she linked and resurrected :).

 

:lol: and :blushing:

 

(Now I really must stop hanging out here and meet my deadline.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I think it is a copyright infringement. By downloading the audio book, you have just gotten a copy to keep for free. The library paid for the audio book it loans out. You did not pay for the copy you made. So unless it's a public domain book it's a copyright violation.

 

Yes, that is copyright infringement. Downloading a CD to your ipod so you can listen to it while running is one thing -- as long as you delete it when you return the CD to the library.

 

When you return the CD, you must not have any copy of it.

 

Our library offers downloadable audio books (a few of them). You get the license for three weeks. After three weeks, the item stops playing.

 

I appreciate this info. I'll be deleting those files. If I want to listen to those books again, I will just recheck them out. Thanks again for discussing copyright laws. It was a great reminder.

 

Janell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think you have the threads confused --nobody in this thread is saying that. You might want to check asta's thread that she linked and resurrected :).

 

Not to start anything (else), but I thought someone was confused about this WAY back in the earlier pages. Then people started talking about consumables versus nonconsumables, and the issue was dropped.

 

Peek a Boo: You're welcome for Calvert's direct link.

 

asta: Thanks for enjoying the licking-cookies analogy. It was only thing I could come up with to make it make sense for some people. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I have been on boards (not here) where individuals have stated that they purchase the original books with the intent to copy them and then resell the original knowing that the resale value of certain publishers is high. They call it a short term investment in education.
I call it breaking the law. ;) It is also something to consider that the publisher's pricing could go down if people didn't do this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been on boards (not here) where individuals have stated that they purchase the original books with the intent to copy them and then resell the original knowing that the resale value of certain publishers is high. They call it a short term investment in education.

 

I've seen this as well.

 

a

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we delved into copyright law back on the old board, I think it was pretty much established w/ links ad nauseum that publishers did have the right to set ludicrous policies about copying their work. But I don't think i saved those discussions....

 

And we come to the second part of the discussion: even if it is blatantly illegal to copy workbooks, how many would do it anyway as part of a civil disobedience type of thing? How far in each direction does ethics go?

 

Yes. I wonder what the trees think. What about the Earth?

I think it is so wasteful to just throw things away. And let's face it, recycling is a burden on Earth as well, just a lesser one....maybe.

 

I have no answer to this dilema, just questions.

 

And I wonder truly if any homeschoolers photocopying workbooks have put any publishers out of business.

 

I have never read any of the copyrights in my books. I will now out of curiosity.

Have there been any cases of prosecution against photocopiers?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes. I wonder what the trees think. What about the Earth?

I think it is so wasteful to just throw things away. And let's face it, recycling is a burden on Earth as well, just a lesser one....maybe.

 

I have no answer to this dilema, just questions.

 

And I wonder truly if any homeschoolers photocopying workbooks have put any publishers out of business.

 

I have never read any of the copyrights in my books. I will now out of curiosity.

Have there been any cases of prosecution against photocopiers?

 

What a great question. I would imagine, as SWB stated, that most publishers simply don't have the time or resources to go after photocopiers. I did find this, though:

 

Princeton University Press v. Michigan Document Services, Inc (6th Cir 1996)

This case has to do with the Fair Use law, which is defined in the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. § 107. In this case, a photocopying service was sued for copyright infringement for making "course packs" for the University of Michigan. In this case, a course pack was a group of reading materials assigned by a professor -- then the course pack was bound together by a professional copy shop.

 

 

a

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have there been any cases of prosecution against photocopiers?

I believe there have been - or at least serious threats have been made. I can't find any online now but I know that when I was in college about 20 years ago copy places suddenly began posting notices about what could and could not be copied in addition to watching carefully what patrons were making copies of. Even small privately owned copy businesses here locally are very cautious about what they will allow you to even self copy.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have been on boards (not here) where individuals have stated that they purchase the original books with the intent to copy them and then resell the original knowing that the resale value of certain publishers is high. They call it a short term investment in education.

If the books' copyright allows for reproduction/copying of content, this is not illegal. Unethical, yes IMO.

 

If the book's copyright does not allow for reproduction, making the copy is illegal. Selling the original is not illegal however. Still unethical in my opinion. I personally do not buy on the resale market from people that I know are openly doing this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


Ă—
Ă—
  • Create New...