Friday, May 26, 2006

Parliamentary Copyright

The whole Hutton report furore brought up an interesting debate upon whether selling downloaded copies of the report for profit was legal under the Parliamentary Copyright licence. I emailed the appropriate office to ask about the legality of doing so, and have just received the following reply.
Dear DK

Thank you for your enquiry.

I can advise that the copyright statement printed as an addendum to The Hutton Enquiry Report does not prevent you printing off copies of the report and selling them for profit.

I would add, however, that in printing this statement the intention was to allow individuals/organisations to reproduce extracts from the report or the entire report together with commentary or analysis rather than to produce facsimile copies of a report already available for purchase.

Other Parliamentary copyright material can be reproduced under the terms of the Parliamentary Click Use Licence. The terms of this licence can be viewed online here (PDF).

If you do proceed with your proposal you should not present your copy of the report as the Official report. To that end you should not reproduce any official imprints, Parliamentary logos or emblems. See paragraph 12.6 of the terms of the Parliamentary Click Use Licence. You should also be aware of Disclaimer in paragraph 16 of the Licence.

Yours sincerely

Mxxxxxxxx Fxxxx

Office of Public Sector Information
St Clements House
2-16 Colegate
Norwich
NR3 1BQ

p: 01603 723010
f: 01603 723000

Unlocking the potential of public sector information at www.opsi.gov.uk

So, the question seems to be: was this a download printed on the Labour Party's printers or not? If it was, then was it presented as the official report?

If it was not and was, in fact, one of the copies available for purchase—for the trifling sum of £70—from the HMSO, then who paid the £70? Was the £70 actually paid to HMSO or were the copies effectively stolen by the Labour Party? Was the £70 paid in the case of the unspecified number of other reports that have been auctioned?

1 comment:

Longrider said...

Although interesting, the copyright issue is moot for me. It is the sheer contempt with which these obnoxious arseholes hold everyone outside their inner circle that sticks in my craw.

They hounded a man to his death - whoever paid for the publication and whether copyright was breached pales into insignificance when compared to the effective dancing on his grave.

I didn't think I could hate as much as I hate these people.

Moonbat still loony

It's always delightful to dip into George Moonbat's nutty articles ... We cannot rely on market forces and corporate goodwill to de...