Conlang relay [relocated] (aka "The Cursed Relay")

[Corumayas]

Thanks, Salmoneus: I was hoping you'd weigh in.

And I agree with you; I really don't want to unexpectedly find my work reposted somewhere else on the internet, for example. (And I know I'm not alone: Dewrad has already made his feelings about this clear, which is why we're not putting copies of his Akana langs up anywhere even though his website's been down for some time.)

I think you're right that there's no need for special licenses for us to work together, at least as long as we're all still in communication with each other. (Although the status of the most collaborative bits may need more discussion and agreement. As far as I know, collaborative works can be jointly owned by the collaborators without having to specify exactly what part of the work belongs to who; but we should probably look into this subject in more detail, especially if we do decide to publish a book eventually.)

I also agree that we should err on the side of getting permission where there's any doubt; in fact, I'd prefer to do this even when we know it's not legally required (e.g. for work originally posted under the FrathWiki or KneeQuickie license), as a matter of courtesy and respect for the authors.

The tricky part is still how to handle the work of any past contributors that we can't reach to ask permission. The question isn't just about a future book, because we're already publishing many people's work online. If we can't reach someone, should we:

a) take their work down and not use it anymore?
b) take it down and replace it with our own work based on/inspired by it?
c) keep it up in its original, unmodified form only?
d) keep it up in its original, unmodified form, alongside our own work based on/inspired by it?

We've been doing each of the above in different cases, but our default has mostly been c) and sometimes d). Though they make sense from the point of view of keeping the conworld coherent, I'm not sure that those are necessarily the best choices ethically speaking.

But maybe we should try to contact all the past contributors before we worry about this?

[Salmoneus]

I think some degree of consent to publish is implicit in the original participation.

[Radius Solis]

Well, what ARE our innate rights to the various material? In the cut-and-dried case where you sit down and write something completely original, then it's obvious, but it's not at all obvious to me whose intellectual property Fáralo or Adāta are: solely Zomp's and Dew's respectively? Or partially also mine because they are derived from my Ndak Ta?

What about for Buruya Nzaysa, derived from with NT by sound changes devised by Boy #12 and with some vocabulary created by him and by me but mostly by Cedh who also wrote the grammar but based most of it on my Naidda and the language is now very much his baby? It's not that I wouldn't be happy for him to do whatever he likes with it, it's that I don't have the foggiest clue who has what "innate rights" in regards to B.Nz. Whose content is it, exactly? Whose permission would be needed for someone else to use it? I have no idea!


As for licensing, I'm sure nobody wants you to give up any rights to your work that you haven't already implicitly given up by proposing it for inclusion in Akana, Sal. It's that I (and presumably Cedh) would like to get those made more explicit so as to avoid future misunderstandings. I think at minimum it entails giving the rest of the Akana group the right to derive daughterlanguages and post-histories from one's conlangs and setting descriptions. We have operated for years under the barely-stated assumption of that right, at least.

It's also that we are using a wiki format to hold the bulk of our content, wikis normally have license statements so that both contributors and readers know what to expect, and our glaring omission of one from our wiki leaves us potentially legally vulnerable. I think? I don't know the laws about this.

[Corumayas]

As I understand it, under US law all work you create is automatically protected by copyright as soon as you write it down. I believe our lack of a licensing statement simply means that the content of the wiki is still owned by its authors with all rights reserved. (Other wikis have licensing statements because their model depends on being "open source" and editable/copyable by absolutely anyone, and that wouldn't be possible if every contribution was copyrighted; I don't believe our project works like that.)

...However, I don't know much about copyright law in other countries, nor about how copyright works on the web. So just to be on the safe side, I'd like us to have a statement, maybe similar to the one on Almeopedia:

The content of Almeopedia is copyright © 2006-2010 by Mark Rosenfelder or the authors of individual articles. The software is the open-source MediaWiki, which you can download for yourself using the link at bottom right. Hosting is provided by Lore Sjöberg.

Collaborative and derivative works are somewhat less obvious, yes. It may take some research to figure out how those work. My impression is that whether a language can be copyrighted is very uncertain, but the thing that's definitely protected is a language description: so I believe the grammar of each Akana lang is simply owned by whoever wrote it (probably jointly owned if there was more than one author). I don't know what rights the author of a parent lang might have; my guess is probably few or none, but my guess is pretty meaningless without looking for legal precedents.


To be more explicit about what permissions we give each other within the project, maybe we could simply ask all our contributors whether they agree to some terms, e.g. something like:

-May we (i.e. other participants in the project) publish your work online (e.g. as part of the Akana wiki)?

-May we use your work as material for deriving descendant languages (and/or cultures), or as background for stories (etc.) set in Akana?

-May we expand on your work (e.g. by adding detail to a grammar description, or vocabulary to a lexicon), or otherwise revise it?

Those all being things that we've done with people's conlangs.

I don't think we need to make agreement to these kinds of terms a prerequisite for participation, necessarily. I think it's fine if someone wants to create a lang for Akana but doesn't want us to publish it (like Dewrad), or doesn't want us to modify it (like the person way back in this thread who didn't want his lang's lexicon expanded without consulting him).

[Radius Solis]

Hmmm. In that case, I would be in favor of just slapping a label on the wiki along the lines of "AkanaWiki contents are copyright 2005-2010 by their respective authors. All rights reserved." for the purpose of making clear to random readers where it stands and leaving it at that, letting our existing principle of mutual respect and accommodation rule the rest.


But I still want to know how to sort out cases where it's hard to tell whose permission would be needed, if any, in the event I ever wanted to sell a work of mine that's partially derived from those of others.

[Corumayas]

That notice sounds fine to me. (It should probably include the © though, just to be thorough-- see below.)

The US copyright office has a bunch of information at http://www.copyright.gov/. Here's some things I found there:

The copyright owner of a work has exclusive rights to:
-Make copies of the work
-Make derivative works based on it
-Distribute copies of it (i.e. publish it)
-Perform or display it in public

The owner can of course grant other people permission to do these things. (For what it's worth, it seems to me that participation in the diachronic relays implicitly granted the other participants permission to do the first two, but not necessarily the others. I'm not sure about the original reconstruction game.)

A collaborative work can have co-owners. On the other hand, a collective work (like a periodical with several articles, or an anthology) can have two levels of copyright: one for the collection as a whole, and one for each individual contribution. It seems like the copyright for the individual contributions is the primary one-- the copyright for the collection normally just covers the selection and arrangement of the pieces.

In the US, a copyright notice used to be required on all published works; since 1989 this is optional. But apparently in some countries that adhere to an older copyright treaty (the UCC of 1955) a copyright notice is still required, and needs to take a specific form:

To guarantee protection for a copyrighted work in all UCC member countries, the notice must consist of the symbol © (the word “copyright” or the abbreviation is not acceptable), the year of first publication, and the name of the copyright proprietor. Example © 2007 John Doe.

Since the question of derivative works is of particular interest to us, I'll quote at more length:

A derivative work is a work based on or derived from one or more already existing works. Also known as a “new version,” a derivative work is copyrightable if it includes what copyright law calls an “original work of authorship.” Any work in which the editorial revisions, annotations, elaborations, or other modifications represent, as a whole, an original work of authorship is a derivative work or a new version.

A typical derivative work registered in the Copyright Office is a primarily new work but incorporates some previously published material. The previously published material makes the work a derivative work under copyright law.

To be copyrightable, a derivative work must differ sufficiently from the original to be regarded as a new work or must contain a substantial amount of new material. ...

Copyright Protection in Derivative Work
The copyright in a derivative work covers only the additions, changes, or other new material appearing for the first time in the work. It does not extend to any preexisting material and does not imply a copyright in that material. ...

Right to Prepare Derivative Work
Only the owner of copyright in a work has the right to prepare, or to authorize someone else to create, a new version of that work. ...

Notice of Copyright
Although not required by law, it is perfectly acceptable (and often helpful) for a work to contain a notice for the original material as well as for the new material. For example, if a previously registered book contains only a new introduction, the notice might be © 1941 John Doe; introduction © 2008 Mary Smith.

Possibly also of interest:

What Is Not Protected by Copyright
Copyright law does not protect ideas, methods, or systems. Copyright protection is therefore not available for ideas or procedures for doing, making, or building things; scientific or technical methods or discoveries; business operations or procedures; mathematical principles; formulas or algorithms; or any other concept, process, or method of operation.

Section 102 of the Copyright Act (title 17 of the U.S. Code) clearly expresses this principle: “In no case does copyright protection for an original work of authorship extend to any idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation, concept, principle, or discovery, regardless of the form in which it is described, explained, illustrated, or embodied in such work.” ...

What Is Protected by Copyright
Copyright protection extends to a description, explanation, or illustration of an idea or system, assuming that the requirements of copyright law are met. Copyright in such a case protects the particular literary or pictorial expression chosen by the author. But it gives the copyright owner no exclusive rights in the idea, method, or system involved.

Suppose, for example, that an author writes a book explaining a new system for food processing. The copyright in the book, which comes into effect at the moment the work is fixed in a tangible form, prevents others from copying or distributing the text and illustrations describing the author’s system. But it will not give the author any right to prevent others from adapting the system itself for commercial or other purposes or from using any procedures, processes, or methods described in the book.

So to the extent that a conlang is an idea or system, it might not be copyrightable under US law; but a specific description of it is. I think you could also argue for a lexicon being copyrightable, and a derivation of that lexicon being a derivative work (at least, it seems like it'd be a lot easier to convince a judge of that than of, say, copyrightable syntax). In that case, if I'm understanding this correctly, anyone wanting to publish an Edastean lang would need your permission to use the Ndak Ta lexicon (and possibly also the permission of the authors of any intermediate lexicons). That is, you would still own the part of their lexicon that's inherited from Ndak Ta.

But this is pretty speculative. I agree that we should be guided by mutual respect and common sense here; if in doubt, it's surely always best to ask for permission.

[Cedh]

I don't really contribute any more, but if I did, I would be very unhappy with cedh's plan to make me give up my copyright. Indeed, it would probably stop me from contributing.
[I know he doesn't say that, but that's what all the long words mean, the talk about 'licenses' and the like. Any "license" is a giving-up of the innate rights, and any uniform 'license' policy across Akana means forcing that giving-up on the individual contributors.]

Indeed I didn't say that. What I wanted to say, apart from (neutrally) bringing attention to some things I thought we should think about, was the following: Since Akana has always been a collaborative project that relies on mutual permission to create derivative works, the terms of a CC license seem suitable within the context of the project. I personally wouldn't have a problem with also granting such rights to other people, and I think technically we might be required to grant them for some of our existing content, but I definitely don't want to force anyone to accept a specific policy in retrospect (although I'll admit I'm not too happy with not being allowed by default to keep a public archive of all Akana material), and I agree with everyone that retaining full copyright towards the outside is a good thing.

In that case, I would be in favor of just slapping a label on the wiki along the lines of "AkanaWiki contents are copyright 2005-2010 by their respective authors. All rights reserved." for the purpose of making clear to random readers where it stands and leaving it at that, letting our existing principle of mutual respect and accommodation rule the rest.

That notice sounds good to me too. (Except that I still have a slight concern about the license used on KQ/FW; maybe we should add some clarification "except where otherwise noted" or something?)

[Corumayas]

Thanks for putting the label on there, Cedh. One usage nitpick: the word "respective" (to my ears anyway) doesn't make sense with the singular "content"; it indicates a kind of distributive relationship (in this case, that each author claims the copyright for their own contribution), which only works if there's multiple things for it to distribute over. So I think it should probably say "the contents of AkanaWiki..." (i.e. more like what Radius wrote), and I changed it to that. If you can think of a better wording feel free to change it again.

Meanwhile, I was thinking we might start trying to contact the folks from the original reconstruction game who've been out of touch, and may not know what we've been doing with their langs (e.g. ghur, Kolyn, Avaja). Maybe it'd be best if Radius could do it, since he was part of the original game?

[Radius Solis]

Thanks for putting the label on there, Cedh. One usage nitpick: the word "respective" (to my ears anyway) doesn't make sense with the singular "content"; it indicates a kind of distributive relationship (in this case, that each author claims the copyright for their own contribution), which only works if there's multiple things for it to distribute over. So I think it should probably say "the contents of AkanaWiki..." (i.e. more like what Radius wrote), and I changed it to that. If you can think of a better wording feel free to change it again.

Respective(ly) is one of the niftiest modifiers we have in this language, IMO. It is surprisingly mathematical: it specifies a one-to-one correspondence between two sets. This saves having to use much wordier constructions - so it's really quite handy. But for it to make any sense in the copyright statement requires interpreting the AkanaWiki's contents as a set, not a mass, which is why the noncount noun "content" doesn't work without the plural to make it a count noun.

Meanwhile, I was thinking we might start trying to contact the folks from the original reconstruction game who've been out of touch, and may not know what we've been doing with their langs (e.g. ghur, Kolyn, Avaja). Maybe it'd be best if Radius could do it, since he was part of the original game?

I can try, though Zompist was the main organizer of the original game, I was just a sign-on. If they remembered me more than anyone else, I'd be surprised. But I'll do what I can.

[dunomapuka]

Meanwhile, I was thinking we might start trying to contact the folks from the original reconstruction game who've been out of touch, and may not know what we've been doing with their langs (e.g. ghur, Kolyn, Avaja). Maybe it'd be best if Radius could do it, since he was part of the original game?

Good idea. I know ghur resurfaced here a little while ago and said she (he?) noticed we'd renovated Ndok Aisô, and was cool with it. She had lost the original materials anyway - but we could double-check with her if there's some particular confirmation we want.

[Corumayas]

Well, I think that's mostly what I wanted to know-- are they ok with how we're using their conlangs? Though maybe we should also ask what things they'd be ok with us doing in the future-- something like the list of questions I wrote a few days ago, but it probably doesn't have to be that formal.

The number of original-game folks that we're out of touch with is even smaller than I thought, then, because:
-- Ran was in here some time ago discussing Proto-Isles with us and did the wikification of it himself, so he's cool.
-- I exchanged pms with Rory a while back; he was fine with us putting Mûtsipsa' online (as long as we credit him as the author), and he seemed pleased and kind of flattered that Etúgə was an important religion.
-- I believe theduke has been in touch with brandrinn about Zele fairly recently, so he's probably covered too.
-- Legion, Dewrad, and zompist are obviously aware of what we've been doing (even though Leg and Dew haven't popped in here in a while-- in fact, I don't think I've talked to Legion in a few months).

So the only ones we're actually missing seem to be Kolyn, Avaja, and Space Dracula. But maybe it'd be good to send a note to everybody anyway? I don't know-- do whatever you think is best, Rad.

[the duke of nuke]

Just to confirm that I did contact brandrinn and he's said he doesn't mind what we do with Zele.

Sending round a message would be good, I think, even though everyone seems to have given approval. Not much to say on the copyright front but the new statement looks like it will do the job

[Corumayas]

Cool.

I had a good chat with cedh on IRC today... among other things, we talked about the map of northern Peilaš, and he had an idea for an alternative tectonic scenario. So there may be a new map proposal in the works. In any case, we agreed that our next major goal is a truly finalized physical map.

[Legion]

So uh, let's say I've been away for like forever like I actually was, can someone briefly brief me on everything I've missed?

[Basilius]

Hi Legion, welcome back, you've been missed :)

(Media are full of news from France; I hope what's going on does not affect you adversely...)

Well, among many other things, there's been something related to Sumarušuxi and its vicinities. From my - strongly biased - perspective...

(1) We've got a lot of new maps. Check the upload logs on the Wiki (its new location, in case you didn't know) - I think you'll be impressed :)

(2) There's been some movement repeatedly sensored around the Isles family in general, for example:

- here;

- here;

- and here.

Also, now we know the name of the guys who pushed the Isles peoples off Tuysáfa: the Wendoth.

This part (early dialectal divisions, specific migration routes, early contacts, etc.) needs your participation: details on Naxuutayi and Thokyunèhòta are essential for settling many issues.

(For example, I'm fancying some common substrate influence affecting pre-Thokyunèhòta and pre-Mûtsipsa'; this may have happened somewhere on Sumarušuxi.)

(2) Lotoka got some flesh (and looks very interesting); this coincided with a discussion that changed a bit our vision of all the neighboring cultures of Siixtaguna and Sumarušuxi.

For me at least, it is more evident now that Sumarušuxi was a culturally dominant area at some point, also mediating influences from the Aiwa sphere which then spread further northwards. Which is another area where your contribution could be essential, e. g. your vision of the history of Sumarušuxi.

(Another topic I'm becoming interested in, in this connection: I think there must be some Thokyunèhòta daughters surviving as "clan dialects" in Affalinnei; I've got some ideas, but I need to know the language better.)

There's been a lot of progress in other areas, too, just check the headlines on Akana Forum!

[dunomapuka]

I'm writing a sample text for Lukpanic. It's part of a creation myth. It's kinda gruesome.

[Corumayas]

It's good to see you again, Legion. I also missed you...

In addition to what Basilius pointed out, there've been some other new languages. Cedh made a new daughter of Fáralo, and Radius is working on a very interesting new language that's unrelated to any of our other langs.

Also, there are now three Coastal Western languages:
-Ishoʻu ʻOhu
-Ìletlégbàku
-Doayâu

Along with those, there's been some more work on the Lukpanic family, including more grammar and vocab and descriptions of some of the later dialects. And apparently now a text, which I'm eager to see!

[Legion]

That seems all good. Here's a more precise question: among the things I'm supposed to be working on, what should I give the priority to?

[the duke of nuke]

Hi Legion! Good to see you back

At the moment there are a fair few things in progress... Both the areas that you've done work on - the Coastal Western sphere and the Isles sphere - are open to new work and fleshing out.
In my view a major priority is the Sumarušuxi / Affalinnei / Doroh area in the later 1st millennium, since we're now seeing plenty of material but we're missing a few key pieces. Doroh in particular needs to be turned into a real language, and it's been suggested as a collaborative project a couple of times - are you up for doing some work on that? I'd certainly be happy to join in.

[Corumayas]

That seems all good. Here's a more precise question: among the things I'm supposed to be working on, what should I give the priority to?

Whatever seems the most fun to you, of course.

(But it does seem like Sumarušuxi is a particularly important region, connected to several other projects. If you wanted to flesh out its language(s), culture(s), and history more, that'd be awesome.)

At the moment, Doroh is waiting for its proto-language ancestors to be filled out more... which cedh and I have been working on slowly but steadily. We seem to be nearing the point where we can start working forward, and other people can join in then... when we get there, we'll start a new thread on the AkanaForum!

[dunomapuka]

At the moment, Doroh is waiting for its proto-language ancestors to be filled out more... which cedh and I have been working on slowly but steadily. We seem to be nearing the point where we can start working forward, and other people can join in then... when we get there, we'll start a new thread on the AkanaForum!

Nice. What is the next step of development that you need to work out? I would really love to see the Eige-Isthmus family blossom. (It seems like there's a half-dozen other things depending on it. I could have a go at Meshi, for example.)

[Legion]

Okay well, I'll start by trying to complete the grammar of Naxuutayi and flesh out the culture of its speakers a bit.

[Cedh]

At the moment, Doroh is waiting for its proto-language ancestors to be filled out more... which cedh and I have been working on slowly but steadily. We seem to be nearing the point where we can start working forward, and other people can join in then... when we get there, we'll start a new thread on the AkanaForum!

Nice. What is the next step of development that you need to work out? I would really love to see the Eige-Isthmus family blossom. (It seems like there's a half-dozen other things depending on it. I could have a go at Meshi, for example.)

We're currently back-projecting the Proto-Isthmus roots into PEI. After this we will have a look at what's been said about PEI morphology, systematize it and decide on the most important features, and write a short sketch of the morphosyntax that we can then all work forward from. If you want to join in now, you could start evaluating the morphology proposals (mostly on the PEI and PI pages and their respective discussion pages on the wiki; maybe there's also something in the Eigə-Isthmus thread on the Akana Forum).

[Corumayas]

After this we will have a look at what's been said about PEI morphology, systematize it and decide on the most important features, and write a short sketch of the morphosyntax that we can then all work forward from. If you want to join in now, you could start evaluating the morphology proposals (mostly on the PEI and PI pages and their respective discussion pages on the wiki; maybe there's also something in the Eigə-Isthmus thread on the Akana Forum).

I've been updating the morphosyntax section on the PEI page as we figure things out, and I've now added a chart of most of the regular Isthmus morphology on the PI talk page. (It doesn't include some of the messier derivational stuff; those are still listed at the top of the PI lexicon. That page is in need of updating too though...)

[Radius Solis]

Hi Legion! Good to see you back.

We're currently back-projecting the Proto-Isthmus roots into PEI. After this we will have a look at what's been said about PEI morphology, systematize it and decide on the most important features, and write a short sketch of the morphosyntax that we can then all work forward from. If you want to join in now, you could start evaluating the morphology proposals (mostly on the PEI and PI pages and their respective discussion pages on the wiki; maybe there's also something in the Eigə-Isthmus thread on the Akana Forum).

Awesome. I will keep an eye on it, and maybe when the time is ripe I can help by fleshing out Miw a little more. Currently I'm neck-deep in Zeluzhia though, enjoying the warm savanna breeze. I actually just this morning posted my notes for Jamna Kopiai's substrate language Tipatirápai, a little exercise in severely constrained phonological conditions. I also put up discussions of semantics and semantic morphology in the Jamna grammar a few days back. Lexicon work is actively proceeding, though it may be a while before it's up.

And as always, the other half of my brain wants to rebel, to run off and do something else - the current notion is a Tmasare daughter that would fit right in between Tlingit and Nuxalk - but I'm trying to learn to focus.