Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

A new paper uploaded!

Expand Messages
  • ashinpan
    Dear members, I have uploaded a new paper. It is entitled Intellectual Property in Early Buddhism: A Legal and Cultural Perspective. It is an extended and
    Message 1 of 16 , Jun 16 9:43 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      Dear members,

      I have uploaded a new paper. It is entitled "Intellectual Property in Early Buddhism: A Legal and Cultural Perspective." It is an extended and revised version of a paper I presented at the International Buddhist Conference (2012 Feb.), Buddhasravaka Bhiksu University, Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka, and the abstract is as follows:

      "In this paper, I examine the modern concepts of intellectual property, and account for their significance in monastic law and culture of early Buddhism. As a result, I have come to the following conclusions:
      1. The infringement of copyrights, patents, and trademarks does not amount to theft as far as Theravadin Vinaya is concerned.
      2. A trademark infringement involves telling a deliberate lie, so entails an offense of expiation (paacittiya), but I cannot find any Vinaya rule which is transgressed by copyright and patent infringements.
      3. The Buddha did recognize the right to intellectual credit, but owing to the commenta­rial interpretations, some traditional circles have come to maintain that intellectual credit can be transferred to someone else."

      As I intend to send it to a scholarly journal, I must state as usual that all rights are reserved. All comments are hearily welcome.

      with metta,

      Ven. Pandita
    • Kumara Bhikkhu
      I wonder if you may have come across an article on the same topic by Ven Varado written some years ago. He arrived at similar conclusions. It s a bit amusing
      Message 2 of 16 , Jun 17 2:33 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        I wonder if you may have come across an article on the same topic by Ven Varado written some years ago. He arrived at similar conclusions.

        It's a bit amusing to me though when I read "I must state as usual that all rights are reserved".

        kb

        ashinpan wrote thus at 12:43 a 17/06/2012:

        >Dear members,
        >
        >I have uploaded a new paper. It is entitled "Intellectual Property in Early Buddhism: A Legal and Cultural Perspective." It is an extended and revised version of a paper I presented at the International Buddhist Conference (2012 Feb.), Buddhasravaka Bhiksu University, Anuradhapura, Sri Lanka, and the abstract is as follows:
        >
        >"In this paper, I examine the modern concepts of intellectual property, and account for their significance in monastic law and culture of early Buddhism. As a result, I have come to the following conclusions:
        >1. The infringement of copyrights, patents, and trademarks does not amount to theft as far as Theravadin Vinaya is concerned.
        >2. A trademark infringement involves telling a deliberate lie, so entails an offense of expiation (paacittiya), but I cannot find any Vinaya rule which is transgressed by copyright and patent infringements.
        >3. The Buddha did recognize the right to intellectual credit, but owing to the commenta­rial interpretations, some traditional circles have come to maintain that intellectual credit can be transferred to someone else."
        >
        >As I intend to send it to a scholarly journal, I must state as usual that all rights are reserved. All comments are hearily welcome.
        >
        >with metta,
        >
        >Ven. Pandita
      • Ong Yong Peng
        Dear venerables, I believe that means the rights to be right, and the rights to be wrong. metta, Yong Peng. ... It s a bit amusing to me though when I read I
        Message 3 of 16 , Jun 17 2:46 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          Dear venerables,

          I believe that means the rights to be right, and the rights to be wrong.


          metta,
          Yong Peng.


          --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Kumara Bhikkhu wrote:

          It's a bit amusing to me though when I read "I must state as usual that all rights are reserved".

          > As I intend to send it to a scholarly journal, I must state as usual that all rights are reserved. All comments are hearily welcome.
        • ashinpan
          ... No, I don t know about that. I would be much obliged if you can point out a link to Ven. Varado s work. ... I find it funny as well, given that I even do
          Message 4 of 16 , Jun 17 5:22 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Kumara Bhikkhu <kumara.bhikkhu@...> wrote:
            >
            > I wonder if you may have come across an article on the same topic by Ven Varado written some years ago. He arrived at similar conclusions.

            No, I don't know about that. I would be much obliged if you can point out a link to Ven. Varado's work.

            > It's a bit amusing to me though when I read "I must state as usual that all rights are reserved".

            I find it funny as well, given that I even do not know what the so-called "all rights" mean. I am only following the suggestion of a student of mine. What he said was basically as follows.

            When your research paper is accepted by a scholarly journal, you must transfer copyrights and whatnot to the journal. But you can transfer your rights only when you have them, not when others have already taken these away. Therefore, you should mention such reservations when you upload your work to public email lists like the Pali Group.

            with metta,

            Ven. Pandita
          • ashinpan
            Dear Yong Peng, ... As I replied to Ven. Kumara in the previous message, I really do not know what all rights reserved means. I just mention that to prevent
            Message 5 of 16 , Jun 17 5:57 AM
            • 0 Attachment
              Dear Yong Peng,

              You wrote:
              >
              > Dear venerables,
              >
              > I believe that means the rights to be right, and the rights to be wrong.
              >

              As I replied to Ven. Kumara in the previous message, I really do not know what "all rights reserved" means. I just mention that to prevent complications arising when I have to publish papers in scholarly journals.

              Is there any alternative for achieving the same end? I would be much obliged if you can suggest me on this matter.

              with metta,

              Ven. Pandita
            • ashinpan
              Dear Ven. Kumara, Thanks to Google, I think I have found the article of Ven. Varado in the article archives of http://sasanarakkha.org. I wish I found it
              Message 6 of 16 , Jun 17 8:51 AM
              • 0 Attachment
                Dear Ven. Kumara,

                Thanks to Google, I think I have found the article of Ven. Varado in the article archives of http://sasanarakkha.org I wish I found it earlier; then, my paper might have been completed much sooner.

                Both Ven. Varado and myself base our arguments on two minor rules of expiation. So our conclusions are also similar. But there are important differences:

                1. Ven. Varado thinks that a monk infringing copyrights can incur a minor offense, but I think that even though he may be making millions by selling pirated books, his copyright infringement, by itself, does not incur any Vinaya offense. (See my reasoning at p. 6.)

                2. Ven. Varado thinks that "for monks vinaya is not a replacement for law but an addition to it," but I believe in the legal autonomy of the Order. Of course, I do not deny that a monk is not only a monk but also a resident of a certain country and accordingly subject to its rules and regulations, but I argue that secular legality is not the business of the Vinaya, nor of the Buddha.(See p. 14-17.)

                Well, my paper has already been sent to a journal but I will ask the editor the protocol appropriate in this matter. If possible, I will add some more material to my paper so that I can give credit to, and also criticize, Ven. Varado.

                with metta,

                Ven. Pandita
              • Kumara Bhikkhu
                Try Creative Commons. It s far more flexible. Good to consult the journal too though.
                Message 7 of 16 , Jun 17 5:18 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Try Creative Commons. It's far more flexible. Good to consult the journal too though.


                  ashinpan wrote thus at 08:57 p 17/06/2012:
                  >As I replied to Ven. Kumara in the previous message, I really do not know what "all rights reserved" means. I just mention that to prevent complications arising when I have to publish papers in scholarly journals.
                  >
                  >Is there any alternative for achieving the same end? I would be much obliged if you can suggest me on this matter.
                • ashinpan
                  ... Well, I have checked the Wikipedia entry for Creative Commons, and consequently got confused. There are 4 factors which can be combined into 15 types of
                  Message 8 of 16 , Jun 19 1:36 AM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Kumara Bhikkhu <kumara.bhikkhu@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Try Creative Commons. It's far more flexible. Good to consult the journal too though.
                    >

                    Well, I have checked the Wikipedia entry for Creative Commons, and consequently got confused. There are 4 factors which can be combined into 15 types of licenses!

                    On the other hand, I like the copyright notice that accompanies the papers published by the Journal of Buddhist Ethics. It runs: "Digital copies of this work may be made and distributed provided no change is made and no alteration is made to the content. Reproduction in any other format, with the exception of a single copy for private study, requires the written permission of the author. All enquiries to:
                    <editor's email address>". So I will put something similar onto the title pages of my paper uploaded here, instead of writing in my posts.

                    Thanks anyway,

                    Ven. Pandita
                  • Kumara Bhikkhu
                    Good idea. Such clear and reasonable copyright statements make a lot more sense compared to the standard one which people don t really understand. You can
                    Message 9 of 16 , Jun 19 5:08 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Good idea. Such clear and reasonable copyright statements make a lot more sense compared to the "standard" one which people don't really understand. You can also make your own concoction out of the 4 attributes of CC.

                      Btw, the titles of your uploads on yahoogroups aren't always easily understood at a glance. E.g. "correct.pdf". Wonder if you'd be willing to title them so that they are scannable. E.g. "Consent for Ordination".

                      ashinpan wrote thus at 04:36 p 19/06/2012:
                      >--- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Kumara Bhikkhu <kumara.bhikkhu@...> wrote:
                      >>
                      >> Try Creative Commons. It's far more flexible. Good to consult the journal too though.
                      >>
                      >
                      >Well, I have checked the Wikipedia entry for Creative Commons, and consequently got confused. There are 4 factors which can be combined into 15 types of licenses!
                      >
                      >On the other hand, I like the copyright notice that accompanies the papers published by the Journal of Buddhist Ethics. It runs: "Digital copies of this work may be made and distributed provided no change is made and no alteration is made to the content. Reproduction in any other format, with the exception of a single copy for private study, requires the written permission of the author. All enquiries to:
                      ><editor's email address>". So I will put something similar onto the title pages of my paper uploaded here, instead of writing in my posts.
                      >
                      >Thanks anyway,
                      >
                      >Ven. Pandita
                    • Kumara Bhikkhu
                      ... Good that you found it. He wrote a similar piece earlier, and when I ask for his permission to publish it on Sasanarakkha Newszine, he provided that
                      Message 10 of 16 , Jun 19 5:47 PM
                      • 0 Attachment
                        ashinpan wrote thus at 11:51 p 17/06/2012:
                        >Dear Ven. Kumara,
                        >
                        >Thanks to Google, I think I have found the article of Ven. Varado in the article archives of http://sasanarakkha.org I wish I found it earlier; then, my paper might have been completed much sooner.

                        Good that you found it. He wrote a similar piece earlier, and when I ask for his permission to publish it on Sasanarakkha Newszine, he provided that updated version.


                        >Both Ven. Varado and myself base our arguments on two minor rules of expiation. So our conclusions are also similar. But there are important differences:
                        >
                        >1. Ven. Varado thinks that a monk infringing copyrights can incur a minor offense, but I think that even though he may be making millions by selling pirated books, his copyright infringement, by itself, does not incur any Vinaya offense. (See my reasoning at p. 6.)

                        Perhaps not by letter. But in spirit, since this is not just a matter of copying for personal use, but for the purpose of making money out of it, I would think that it's a dukkata.


                        >2. Ven. Varado thinks that "for monks vinaya is not a replacement for law but an addition to it," but I believe in the legal autonomy of the Order. Of course, I do not deny that a monk is not only a monk but also a resident of a certain country and accordingly subject to its rules and regulations, but I argue that secular legality is not the business of the Vinaya, nor of the Buddha.(See p. 14-17.)

                        I think you two don't actually disagree on this point in spirit.


                        >Well, my paper has already been sent to a journal but I will ask the editor the protocol appropriate in this matter. If possible, I will add some more material to my paper so that I can give credit to, and also criticize, Ven. Varado.

                        You mean his arguments, right?


                        peace

                        Kumâra Bhikkhu

                        Catch the news from Sasanarakkha Buddhist Sanctuary! To be informed of special activities in SBS and Dhamma teaching tours by SBS monks, join SBSmail:
                        * EITHER register at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/sbsmail/join/ (Yahoo! ID required. You can read the group description here too.)
                        * OR send a blank mail to sbsmail-subscribe@yahoogroups.com (If you don't have and don't want a Yahoo! ID, when you get the request for confirmation, just click reply and send off mail, with or without the body text.)
                      • ashinpan
                        Dear Ven. Kumara ... Well, I did give a brief description together with each file I have uploaded. Nevertheless, more descriptive file names may be better,
                        Message 11 of 16 , Jun 22 7:59 AM
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Dear Ven. Kumara

                          You wrote:
                          > Btw, the titles of your uploads on yahoogroups aren't always easily understood at a glance. E.g. "correct.pdf". Wonder if you'd be willing to title them so that they are scannable. E.g. "Consent for Ordination".

                          Well, I did give a brief description together with each file I have uploaded. Nevertheless, more descriptive file names may be better, anyway. I will try to do better with my forthcoming papers. Thanks for the suggestion.

                          with metta,

                          Ven. Pandita
                        • ashinpan
                          ... No, I think we are different in spirit as well. Please check my newly uploaded paper. ... Again, I must refer you to my new version of the paper. ... Of
                          Message 12 of 16 , Jun 22 8:06 AM
                          • 0 Attachment
                            --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, Kumara Bhikkhu <kumara.bhikkhu@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > >1. Ven. Varado thinks that a monk infringing copyrights can incur a minor offense, but I think that even though he may be making millions by selling pirated books, his copyright infringement, by itself, does not incur any Vinaya offense. (See my reasoning at p. 6.)
                            >
                            > Perhaps not by letter. But in spirit, since this is not just a matter of copying for personal use, but for the purpose of making money out of it, I would think that it's a dukkata.
                            >

                            No, I think we are different in spirit as well. Please check my newly uploaded paper.

                            > >2. Ven. Varado thinks that "for monks vinaya is not a replacement for law but an addition to it," but I believe in the legal autonomy of the Order. Of course, I do not deny that a monk is not only a monk but also a resident of a certain country and accordingly subject to its rules and regulations, but I argue that secular legality is not the business of the Vinaya, nor of the Buddha.(See p. 14-17.)
                            >
                            > I think you two don't actually disagree on this point in spirit.
                            >

                            Again, I must refer you to my new version of the paper.

                            >
                            > You mean his arguments, right?
                            >

                            Of course, academic papers are not for personal attacks :).

                            with metta

                            Ven. Pandita
                          • Ong Yong Peng
                            Dear Ven. Pandita, please refer to Yahoo! Terms of Service, which applies to the use of onlines services hosted by Yahoo! for forums, mailing lists, and
                            Message 13 of 16 , Jun 22 5:09 PM
                            • 0 Attachment
                              Dear Ven. Pandita,

                              please refer to Yahoo! Terms of Service, which applies to the use of onlines services hosted by Yahoo! for forums, mailing lists, and sharing of information. There are clauses which explicitly mention Yahoo! Groups, which are of interest to you.

                              http://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/en-us/

                              metta,
                              Yong Peng.


                              --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, ashinpan wrote:

                              As I replied to Ven. Kumara in the previous message, I really do not know what "all rights reserved" means. I just mention that to prevent complications arising when I have to publish papers in scholarly journals.
                            • ashinpan
                              Dear Yong Peng ... I have done so, and I am confused by the following: However, with respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly
                              Message 14 of 16 , Jun 23 12:14 AM
                              • 0 Attachment
                                Dear Yong Peng
                                You wrote:
                                >
                                > please refer to Yahoo! Terms of Service, which applies to the use of onlines services hosted by Yahoo! for forums, mailing lists, and sharing of information. There are clauses which explicitly mention Yahoo! Groups, which are of interest to you.

                                I have done so, and I am confused by the following:
                                "However, with respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo! Services, you grant Yahoo! the following worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive license(s), as applicable:
                                a. With respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of Yahoo! Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Yahoo! Services solely for the purposes of providing and promoting the specific Yahoo! Group to which such Content was submitted or made available. "

                                As far as I understand it, it is applicable to my papers uploaded here thus: any member can cite parts of my paper in the Group discussion or make a modified version for use in the Group only. Is it correct?

                                with metta
                              • Ong Yong Peng
                                Dear Ven. Pandita, the clause only relates your activities (i.e. submissions/sharing of content) to Yahoo! licensing. In particular, the end of clause 9 states
                                Message 15 of 16 , Jun 30 8:39 PM
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  Dear Ven. Pandita,

                                  the clause only relates your activities (i.e. submissions/sharing of content) to Yahoo! licensing. In particular, the end of clause 9 states that:

                                  "publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo! Services would not include portions of Yahoo! Groups that are limited to members"

                                  Reading this in conjunction with the rest of the clause, when you upload your writings ONLY in the Files section, you are NOT granting Yahoo! a "worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive license".

                                  There are other clauses covering infringement of copyright and intellectual property (IP).

                                  I have to say I am no legal expert on issues of licensing, copyright & IP. I suggest you consult your publisher or a legal advisor.


                                  metta,
                                  Yong Peng.

                                  --- In Pali@yahoogroups.com, ashinpan wrote:

                                  I have done so, and I am confused by the following:

                                  "However, with respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo! Services, you grant Yahoo! the following worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive license(s), as applicable:
                                  a. With respect to Content you submit or make available for inclusion on publicly accessible areas of Yahoo! Groups, the license to use, distribute, reproduce, modify, adapt, publicly perform and publicly display such Content on the Yahoo! Services solely for the purposes of providing and promoting the specific Yahoo! Group to which such Content was submitted or made available. "

                                  As far as I understand it, it is applicable to my papers uploaded here thus: any member can cite parts of my paper in the Group discussion or make a modified version for use in the Group only. Is it correct?
                                • ashinpan
                                  Dear Yong Peng, Sorry for my late reply. Owing to some problems with my computer, I have been almost off-line for the past few days. ... Then, the copyright
                                  Message 16 of 16 , Jul 4, 2012
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    Dear Yong Peng,

                                    Sorry for my late reply. Owing to some problems with my computer, I have been almost off-line for the past few days.

                                    You wrote:
                                    >
                                    > the clause only relates your activities (i.e. submissions/sharing of content) to Yahoo! licensing. In particular, the end of clause 9 states that:
                                    >
                                    > "publicly accessible areas of the Yahoo! Services would not include portions of Yahoo! Groups that are limited to members"
                                    >
                                    > Reading this in conjunction with the rest of the clause, when you upload your writings ONLY in the Files section, you are NOT granting Yahoo! a "worldwide, royalty-free and non-exclusive license".

                                    Then, the copyright notice that I have put on my last paper is much more generous than the original Yahoo! licensing. I think it is good.
                                    >
                                    > There are other clauses covering infringement of copyright and intellectual property (IP).
                                    >
                                    > I have to say I am no legal expert on issues of licensing, copyright & IP. I suggest you consult your publisher or a legal advisor.
                                    >

                                    Well, I am a follower of the Open Access movement concerning academic publishing. The rule of thumb recommended by the proponents of that movement is "don't ask, don't tell." So I think I will change my path of action only when my publisher expresses objection to my practice of archiving my paper drafts here. Up to now, there is almost no possibility of such objections, for the Journal of Buddhist Ethics where I have published my recent papers is an Open Access journal itself; so I expect no problem from their quarters.

                                    Anyhow, thanks a lot for your suggestion.

                                    with metta,

                                    Ven. Pandita
                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.