Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin
General Discussion
 FSI Language Courses Forum : Learning Languages : General Discussion
Message Icon Topic: FSI only? What about DLI? Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 2
Author Message
eurasia
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 12 December 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7
Quote eurasia Replybullet Posted: 07 March 2007 at 9:22pm
I note the following from the NTIS Foreign Language Training catalogue:
 
This catalog features audio and video self-instructional language training programs produced by the National Foreign Affairs Training Center of the U.S. Department of State, the Defense Language Institute of the U.S. Department of Defense, the Center for the Advancement of Language Learning, and the Central Intelligence Agency. Courses are available from the NTIS’ National Audiovisual Center with or without texts.
 
I note under Standard Chinese:  a Modular Approach
 

Produced by the National Foreign Affairs Training Center and the Defense Language Institute

So just being listed in NTIS doesn't seem to mean that it isn't DLI.  Or is one trying to say that DLI listed in NTIS are OK for posting?

IP IP Logged
Chung
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 23 May 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 143
Quote Chung Replybullet Posted: 07 March 2007 at 9:42pm
Because NTIS is the federal government's distributor, that means that it can sell material from federal agencies. It makes no mention on whether all of the material that NTIS sells is exempt from copyright protection. In other words, some of the stuff at NTIS could indeed have copyright protection and we plebes just don't know it.
 
The subtlety is that material from federal agencies can have copyrights but it doesn't occur too often.
 
In most cases, material of the federal government does NOT have copyright protection in the USA. However, Demipuppet does hit on a valid point.
 
If government employees produce something as part of their job duties, then that product will not have copyright protection.
 
If someone gets a contract from the government to produce something, that someone can get still copyright protection for that work, with the government having permission to use that work or sell it.
 
If someone produces something and then gives it to the government, that person can transfer his/her copyright protection of that work so that the government would hold the copyright.
IP IP Logged
DemiPuppet
Administrator
Administrator


Joined: 27 May 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 163
Quote DemiPuppet Replybullet Posted: 07 March 2007 at 9:45pm
The Chinese books are have a weak disclaimer in the introduction stating that copying is permitted for non-profit use.  But it also says that some of the material may be copyright...

BTW, I notice Multilingual books is selling a PDF version of the some of the Chinese course volumes.  Their sample file is missing the copyright disclaimer. I assume they must have received permission from the DLI or don't believe there is a copyright issue with the particular volumes .
IP IP Logged
TheBigZaboon
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 06 August 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 32
Quote TheBigZaboon Replybullet Posted: 07 March 2007 at 9:56pm

I've been following this thread for sometime, and believe me, there is nobody who would like access to DLI materials more than I, but for certain sets of DLI (and FSI materials, for that matter) caution is required. For older DLI materials, those developed solely by DLI, arguments that there are no copyrights involved because it is government  material developed with taxpayer money, may have validity. But newer materials, starting in the 80's, have incorporated materials that are in fact copyrighted by other people or institutions. In the case of DLI materials,  some stuff copyrighted by others is included, and it is so stated. Whether these groups might fight for rights to this stuff is not clear.

 

In the case of FSI materials, the Japanese course is still being modified and improved by the original author and her partners, and marketed by a number of companies. This puts the older versions of the Japanese course in a grey area. It may in fact be legal to post older versions, but if the current developers put up a fuss, it would be quite costly just to defend what may be a perfectly valid right to post the original government version. It really depends on the "personality" of the institutions or individuals involved. I think the Japanese course would be a risk.

 

This site has been active, and garnering a good deal of attention, for some time. The reaction  has been positive, and maybe even tacitly encouraged, as the prevailing sentiment is that more speakers of foreign languages is better. But there are certain materials that may involve a few issues that would not be ignored by individuals. NTIS, etc., are not profit oriented entities, and are not really able to provide proper, wide-scale distribution of materials. I am not so sure about academic presses/publishers, and individual academics, though. They may feel that they can and should be the purveyors of "their" materials.

 

I think caution is necessary.  We all want access to the materials, but I think we also want to protect the rights of those who may have them, even if they are not so obvious at first.

TBZ

 
IP IP Logged
Poetry
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 11 March 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 49
Quote Poetry Replybullet Posted: 11 March 2007 at 9:18pm
Hi,
I'm new to this forum.  It must be a fairly new forum anyway because I'd swear that I didn't see it 6 months ago when I was crawling all over the web looking for materials.
 
I actually have in hand a complete set of the DLI Modern Standard Arabic books and tapes, July 1981 and revised December 1983.  I also have the Iraqi dialect course books and tapes from that timeframe.  And the Syrian/Lebanese dialect books (but no tapes) from that timeframe.
 
I've been digitizing them myself for my brother who was stationed in Iraq for a year.  However, he came home injured just shortly after I got the tapes and books, so the effort is no where near complete.  I myself was an Arabic linguist for the US Army about two decades ago.  The tapes are in good condition.  So are the books, though the type in these books leaves a lot to be desired.  It's readable once you enlarge the print. 
 
I think a lot of the discussion about copyright/no copyright could be cleared up pretty simply.  I myself got permission from them to digitize and send out the course to the troops in my brother's unit.  The guys in the unit were having a terrible time getting language materials for god knows what reason.  They were absolutely enthusiastic about getting the old DLI course in hand to work with, because while the new DLI courses are much more thorough in training, they require a teacher.  The old DLI courses work very well as stand-alone training materials.  Now, that was for the use and comfort of soldiers, not for civilians.  But I think that since there are newer courses and these were developed for government use, that there's a good argument to present about releasing them for public use. 
 
I think we just need to begin the asking process.  They were pretty good to me when I asked previously.  Though it was for soldiers.  This type of release may need something more formalized.  I can begin that process.  This is an election year, ya know.
 
--Poetry
IP IP Logged
daristani
Contributor
Contributor


Joined: 04 March 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 104
Quote daristani Replybullet Posted: 12 March 2007 at 3:59pm
Poetry, it seems to me that you've got a real treasure-trove with the DLI Arabic materials, and I think there would be any number of people who would be very grateful to you if you were to find some way to make it available, whether on this site or elsewhere.  The fact that it's a "stand-alone" type product, in particular, makes it extremely attractive for people working on their own.  Accordingly, I think that whatever persuasive efforts you can bring to bear with the military would be very useful.  Your point on this being an election year is also well taken, and if the DLI people should balk at allowing the materials to be made available, it would seem to me that citing the crying need for people trained in Arabic, in the context of raising the issue with your elected representative(s), might help the cause.  I would hope that an organized campaign would not be necessary, but it you should get turned down initially, I speculate that people from this site or elsewhere might be interested in mounting a follow-up effort to try to spring this material loose, along with other such materials.  In any event, I think you could make a tremendous resource available, and hope that you'll give it a shot.

On a totally unrelated matter, I note that "A textbook of Modern Western Armenian", by Bardakjian and Thompson, was copyrighted in 1977 by Harvard College, but says "Copyright is claimed until 1987.  Thereafter all portions covered by copyright will be in the public domain."  I suspect that there are a good many similar cases out there when books/tapes are produced by grants from the Department of Education, and thus that there's considerable potential for posting such stuff if people just pay attention to the copyright data of non-FSI, non-DLI materials.

Finally, I just want to note once again how impressed I am with people like Poetry and the other contributors here, who are so selfless in making materials they have available.  Many times these materials are purchased for no little amount of money, and there's also considerable work involved in scanning, digitizing, etc.  So making them freely available to one and all in this way is truly a tremendous service.   
IP IP Logged
Poetry
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 11 March 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 49
Quote Poetry Replybullet Posted: 12 March 2007 at 8:27pm
Hi Daristani,
The old 1980s DLI courses are what we used to term "Drill and Kill." That means that it was done by repetition. The Modern Standard Arabic course that I've got was 47 weeks long. There's a box or two of tapes.

We'll see how this conversation with them goes. They were pretty fast with the permission before, but I was doing the copies for soldiers. Soldiers who had the most inept young Captain in charge that didn't want to bother his commanding officer (a bird Colonel, unfortunately, which appears to have intimidated the Capt's initiative) with requests for basic materials.

--Poetry
IP IP Logged
Poetry
Newbie
Newbie


Joined: 11 March 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 49
Quote Poetry Replybullet Posted: 22 March 2007 at 6:32pm
Nothing from the email sent to DLI yet, but I don't know if I really expect that to do it. It's going to take a letter writing campaign, I'm afraid.

However, I did find out that the Mandarin Chinese course used in the 1980s was partially the one taught by Yale University and just licensed to DLI. So, for the Mandarin Chinese course, at least, that is probably not public domain.

The Arabic courses were created there. They were re-recording and recreating parts when I went through, and many of the tapes are the instructors that I had --complete with sounds of throats clearing, swallowing, and various background drec. Therefore, I hold high hopes that they will be cleared eventually.

--Poetry
IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 2
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



This page was generated in 0.187 seconds.