Online standard of perfection.

[Sonoran Silkies]

I have my own copy; I was mostly playing devil's advocate; I believe that anyone who has decided to seriously breed or exhibit should own a copy.

That said, I don't believe everyone needs to purchase every available standard. Personally I own the Bantam Standard, and see no need to purchase the APA Standard of Perfection; my breeds are bantams. If I ever decide to breed large fowl I am sure I will make the necessary purchase.

 

[blackred]

Quote:
I agree, you don't need to purchase the latest Standard, or even the APA SOP in your case. But there are some subtle differences in the 2 standards.

As far as playing Devils Advocate, to a degree your point is valid. But they are easily found if you want them.
Maybe when the Obama's start showing poultry then Oprah will have the new APA Standard on her show. Till then we will have to do what we can......

Bob

 

[TimG]

Quote:
As has been pointed out elsewhere in this forum today, where copyright law is concerned "facts" and "ideas" are considered synonymous.

I still think that the APA can claim ownership (copyright) of their descriptions of a breed (the expression of the idea), but not the idea behind the description.

The APA includes in their copyrighted breed descriptions that it is a disqualification if an Orpington has yellow beak, shanks, feet or skin. Even if the APA created these rules (the idea), they cannot prevent someone else from describing these rules (ideas) in their own words.

Further, where the compilation of facts (or ideas) is concerned the compilation must be original or creative in its composition in order to be protected. There is nothing original or creative about listing disqualifications.

After reading this article from wikipedia which nifty-chicken cited in another thread (and from which I took some ideas for the above paragraphs), I am becoming more convinced that the breed characteristics (ideas) in the APA Standards of Perfection are not protected under copyright law but that the presentation of those ideas is. The APA books cannot be copied, but the descriptions can be restated.

The included drawings are another story.

 

[NYREDS]

What a foolish arguement. The APA & ABA Standard publications absolutely are copyrighted material.

Further, where the compilation of facts (or ideas) is concerned the compilation must be original or creative in its composition in order to be protected. There is nothing original or creative about listing disqualifications -What in the wild world of sports does this mean??? I think you're straining at ideas that are clearly beyond you.

If you really think you have a right to republish copyrighted material on the internet with impunity go ahead & try it. Why not start with a Steven King novel-the "idea" of haunted houses isn't origional either is it?

 

[TimG]

Quote:
I'm 100% sure that Stephen King cannot prevent me from publishing a story about haunted houses.

 

[amazondoc]

The new APA SOP book is scheduled to be out this fall. HOWEVER, the APA is having difficulty raising the funds that will be necessary to print the new standard -- so it may be delayed.

If you want to know the standard for a specific breed, go to that specific club's web site. If you want to know ALL the standards, buy the book.

Nobody can be sued for copyright infringement if they publish a brief excerpt of a larger copyrighted work for the purpose of education, which is exactly what publishing one breed's standard would be. But you can't publish the whole book. Similarly, I can publish one page of a Stephen King novel with impunity -- as long as I give credit, use the page for educational purposes or for the purpose of literary critique, and I don't make a profit from it. There is nothing secret/classified about the standards, just don't go overboard in your use of them.

ETA -- if you want further details, look up "fair use principles" on google. There's a LOT of info out there.

 

[Sonoran Silkies]

Thank you amazondoc! Very reasonable

 

[blackred]

This is almost comical- the amount of energy being spent on how to get out of paying for something. We are talking $10-$14 dollars here for pete's sake, and stealing from a 136 year old lady!

You can twist and turn this any way you want but it is wrong. You even said it yourself- The APA is having trouble raising the capital to get the new standard published. If this is true then you should be Doubly Ashamed.

Bob

 

[amazondoc]

Quote:
Calm down, for heaven's sake. I'm an APA member myself, so I support their efforts.

There is NOTHING wrong with Fair Use usage of copyrighted material. That's why it's called "FAIR" use.

 

[pipermark]

Posting the standard of the birds for non-profit, educational purposes , does not constitute a copy right infringement. If you were to use any of the other descriptive copy or pictures , you would be busted.

If you have the 2001 edition, to the best of my understanding, they have not put out another one, nor have any breed changes been made or new breeds accepted since that one was authored. (could be wrong there).