"නිදහස් අන්තර්ගතය" හි සංශෝධන අතර වෙනස්කම්

==Legality==

===Traditional copyright===

[[Image:Copyright.svg|thumb|140px|The [[copyright symbol]]]]

Traditionally, copyright is a legal concept, which grants the author or creator of a work legal rights to control the [[copying|duplication]] and public performance of his or her work. In many jurisdictions, this is limited by a time period after which the works then enter the [[public domain]]. During the time period of copyright the author's work may only be copied, modified, or publicly performed with the consent of the author, unless the use is a [[fair use]].

 

===Public domain===

[[Image:PD-icon.svg|thumb|140px|A [[public domain]] symbol]]

The public domain is a range of creative works whose [[copyright]] has expired, or was never established; as well as ideas and facts<ref group="nb">The copyright status of uncreative aggregates of basic data may differ by region, for the USA see ''[[Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service]]'', for [[Australia]], see ''[[Telstra v Desktop Marketing Systems]]''</ref> which are ineligible for copyright. A public domain work is a work whose author has either relinquished to the public, or no longer can claim control over, the distribution and usage of the work. As such any person may manipulate, distribute, or otherwise utilize the work, without legal ramifications. A work released into the public domain, or under a very liberal license, by its author may be referred to as "[[copycenter]]".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/C/copycenter.html |title=Copycenter |last=Raymond |first=Eric S. |authorlink=Eric S. Raymond |publisher=The [[Jargon File]] |accessdate=August 9, 2008 }}</ref>

 

===Copyleft===

[[Image:Copyleft.svg|thumb|140px|The [[copyleft]] symbol]]

Copyleft is a play on the word copyright and describes the practice of using copyright law to remove restrictions on distributing copies and modified versions of a work.<ref name="Dusollier">{{cite journal|title=Open source and copyleft. Authorship reconsidered?|author=Dusollier, S|series=Columbia journal of Law and the Arts|year=2003|volume=26|issue=296}}</ref> The aim of copyleft is to use the legal framework of copyright to enable non-author parties to be able to reuse and, in many licensing schemes, modify content that is created by an author. Unlike public domain or other non-copyleft free work, the author still maintains copyright over the material, however the author has granted a non-exclusive license to any person to distribute, and often modify, the work. Copyleft licenses require that any [[derivative work]]s be distributed under the same terms, and that the original copyright notices be maintained.

 

===Software===

[[Image:Opensource.svg|thumb|140px|The logo of the [[Open Source Initiative]], an organization dedicated to promoting open source software]]

[[Image:FSF-Logo.svg|thumb|240px|The logo of the [[Free Software Foundation]], the organization founding the principles of [[free software]].]]

 

===Academia===

[[Image:Open Access logo PLoS white.svg|thumb|120px|The [[Open access (publishing)|open access]] logo, originally designed by the [[Public Library of Science]]]]

In academic work, free works are still a niche phenomenon, owing to the difficulty of establishing a fully qualified peer review process. Authors may see [[Open access (publishing)|open access publishing]] as a method of expanding the audience that is able to access their work to allow for greater impact of the publication, or for ideological reasons.<ref>{{cite url|title=Open access self-archiving: An author study|url=http://eprints.ecs.soton.ac.uk/10999/1/jisc2.pdf}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |url= http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue37/andrew/ |title=Trends in Self-Posting of Research Material Online by Academic Staff |accessdate=March 22, 2009 |last=Andrew |first=Theo |date=October 30, 2003 |journal=Ariadne |issue= 37 | publisher=[[UKOLN]] |issn=1361-3200}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jisc.ac.uk/uploaded_documents/JISCOAreport1.pdf |title=JISC/OSI Journal Authors Survey Report |accessdate=March 22, 2009 |author=Key Perspectives |publisher=[[Joint Information Systems Committee]] (JISC) |format=PDF}}</ref> Despite these difficulties, groups such as the [[Public Library of Science]] and [[Biomed Central]] still provide capacity for review and publishing of free works; though such publications tend to be limited to fields such as life sciences. Some universities, such as the [[Massachusetts Institute of Technology]] (MIT), have adopted open access publishing by default.<ref>{{cite web|title=MIT faculty open access to their scholarly articles|date=20 March 2009|url=http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2009/open-access-0320.html|publisher=MIT news}}</ref> In traditional journals, alternatives such as delayed free publications or charging researchers for open access publishing are occasionally used.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://mic.sgmjournals.org/misc/self_archiving.dtl|title=Policy of the Society for General Microbiology towards author self-archiving on PubMed Central and institutional and other repositories|accessdate=April 10, 2009}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/authorresources/onlineopen.html|title=OnlineOpen|accessdate=April 10, 2009}}</ref> Some funding agencies require academic work to be published in the public domain as a grant requirement.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/grants/partnerships/_files/funding_policy.pdf |title=NHMRC Partnership Projects – Funding Policy |accessdate=March 22, 2009 |last=Haslam |first=Maryanne |publisher=[[National Health and Medical Research Council]] (NHMRC) |format=PDF}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/notice-files/not-od-05-022.html|title= Policy on Enhancing Public Access to Archived Publications Resulting from [[National Institute of Health|NIH]]-Funded Research | accessdate=July 12, 2009}}</ref> [[Open content]] publication has been seen as a method of reducing costs associated with information retrieval in research, as universities typically pay to subscribe for access to content that is published through traditional means <ref>{{cite journal |title=Libraries face higher costs for academic journals |accessdate=March 22, 2009 |last=Mayor |first=Susan |date=April 19, 2003 |journal=[[BMJ]]: British Medical Journal |publisher=[[BMJ Group]] |volume=326 |issue=7394 |page=840 |pmc=1125769}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.ams.org/membership/journal-survey.html|title=AMS Journal price survey|accessdate=May 23, 2009}}</ref><ref name="WellcomeTrustReport">{{cite web|title=Costs and business models in scientific research publishing: A report commissioned by the Wellcome Trust|url=http://www.wellcome.ac.uk/stellent/groups/corporatesite/@policy_communications/documents/web_document/wtd003184.pdf|accessdate=May 23, 2009}}</ref> whilst improving journal quality by discouraging the submission of research articles of reduced quality.<ref name="WellcomeTrustReport"/>

===Governance===

<!-- editors note: This section requires significant improvement with less "e-government focus" and a greater historical context. -->

Technological developments have enabled distribution of otherwise inaccessible documentation in government to be made directly available to citizens from any location for minimal cost. This allows information on lawmaking, local and state government to be analysed by a government's constituents. Although previously information has been in the form of media releases for [[public relation]]s purposes, documentation that may be of use to citizens and businesses has, in some jurisdictions, been mandated to be released by default.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://vancouver.ca/ctyclerk/cclerk/20090519/documents/motionb2.pdf|title=Motion on Notice: Open Data, Open Standards and Open Source}}/</ref> This is in contrast to laws such as the [[freedom of information act]], or their local equivalent, which may make documentation available only on request, rather than mandate explicit publication. Such a stance has been cited as an aid to the reduction in complexity associated with government processes, as well as aiding a reduction in corruption.<ref>{{cite journal|doi=10.1081/PAD-200029114|journal=International Journal of Public Administration|volume=27|date=10 January 2005|last1=Cho|pages=719–735|first1=Yong Hyo | title=E-Government to Combat Corruption: The Case of Seoul Metropolitan Government| author8=Yong Hyo Cho; Byung-Dae Choi}}</ref>