The Legalities of Conversion

[DaleDe]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

I would say "verbatim copies" means the actually text and not the binary. I've seen that where for download are different ebook editions. So yes, I would go with "not changing the text when you change the format". Also, if you are talking about not changing the binary, then it would be impossible to perform an ebook. So since that also gives the right to perform the work, then that would be changing it from the format it was in to a new format. So that has to mean "the format is ok to change as long as the text is not changed".

I would certainly agree with this definition. When you quote someone's data nobody cares that the quote has to be on the same page and formatted exactly the same. It is the content that verbatim means, not the format. A single document can be reflowed to fit a device with changing the content. PDF files can be repaginated and reflowed on the spot depending on the reader and device. The binary rule certainly does not apply to verbatim and is a electronic artifact. If the binary rule applied you couldn't even move a file from a pc to a mac due to the line end conventions.

Dale

[jbenny]

Related to all of this, I recently found this web site, which claims to allow conversion between many different formats. No ebook formats were listed, however (PDF doesn't count). I haven't tried it myself, so I don't know the quality of the conversions.

http://www.zamzar.com/

[Kilarney]

Originally Posted by JSWolf

You must have good lawyers. They're Jewish.

That was uncalled for.

[VillageReader]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The actual phrase used in the licence is "Licensees may copy, distribute, display and perform only verbatim copies of the work, not derivative works based upon it." I suppose it's a question of whether a different format constitutes a "verbatim copy" or not. My gut feeling is that it doesn't - it's a file with different binary contents.

In a dictionary definition, verbatim refers to words, not bits & bytes. One would presume a verbatim copy doesn't change the text, not how that text is stored on a disk. But, in this arena, people often make up their own definitions

[NatCh]

Originally Posted by VillageReader

But, in this arena, people often make up their own definitions

Do you mean on-line forums, or copyright law?

[HarryT]

Originally Posted by NatCh

Do you mean on-line forums, or copyright law?

Or lawyers .

[Nigel]

Converting should come under "Fair Usage" just as it does with movies and music. One should only run afoul if giving a copy, converted or not to someone else.

[HarryT]

If you read the start of the thread you'll see that "converting for the purpose of reposting" was the original question. If a book has a CC licence saying "no derived works", is it permissible to convert to a different format without the author's permission?

[nekokami]

I think it hangs on the definition of "derived works." I wouldn't consider a new file format to be a "derived work," but I'm not a lawyer (in any country).