Please 公式文書，認める: All とじ込み／提出するs 示すd with a copyright notice are 支配する to normal copyright 制限s. These とじ込み／提出するs may, however, be downloaded for personal use. Electronically 分配するd texts may easily be corrupted, deliberately or by technical 原因（となる）s. When you base other 作品 on such texts, 二塁打-check with a printed source if possible.

These three articles have 以前 been published in the Swedish daily Svenska Dagbladet in 1994:
Svensk 見解／翻訳／版 från Svenska Dagbladet 1994.

I. The electronic age - on the 瀬戸際 of total memory loss?
II. The hacker - archaeologist of the 未来?
III. Dare we 信用 the authenticity of electronic texts?

III. Dare we 信用 the authenticity of electronic texts?

by Karl-Erik Tallmo

The 広大な／多数の／重要な difficulties 伴う／関わるd in 保存するing electronically published 文書s for the 未来 have been discussed in two previous articles. There are two 問題／発行するs 関係のある to computer based texts, which have already become problematic: authenticity and copyright.

In the middle ages, 調書をとる／予約するs were copied by 手渡す, mostly by 修道士s. Different copies of a 調書をとる／予約する 含む／封じ込めるd different errors, 予定 to misinterpreted 口述 or 審議する／熟考する "改良s" of 独断的な scribes. The art of Gutenberg made it possible to 凍結する the text once it was printed. The 版 became a constant, not the individual copy.

Through more than 500 years we have grown accustomed to the 調書をとる／予約する 存在 something 比較して unchangeable and reliable. The 出現 of the electronic 調書をとる／予約する, however, takes us in a sense two steps backwards, since here not even the copy is a constant. Anybody who has ever worked with a word-加工業者 knows how 平易な it is to change a few words in a computer とじ込み／提出する - and that it is done without a trace.

If one スピードを出す／記録につけるs on to the database Patrologia Latina and looks up something by Tertullian - how canone be sure that it is Migne's 版? The publisher Chadwyck-Healay of course certifies, as any other publisher would, with their hallmark, that the contents as far as they can 支配（する）／統制する and ascertain are verbatim.

But what if someone has 切り開く／タクシー／不正アクセスd his way into the database and made changes? If one copys the text の上に a diskette and gives it to somebody, who in turn 手渡すs it over to a friend who 令状s a dissertation - dare this 候補者 believe that the quotations he interposes in his text are 訂正する?

The 平易な 接近 to electronic texts is both their strength and their 証拠不十分. If texts are spread from person to person in a 全く uncontrolled manner, the result might be a 漸進的な alteration as is the 事例／患者 with oral 伝達／伝染. The text will undoubtedly degenerate.

When text is digitized with a scanner and a program for 光学の character 承認 (OCR), there are always errors. For instance, r+n may be 解釈する／通訳する ed as m and 無 might come out as the letter O.

The staff at the American Memory 事業／計画（する） calculates that it costs 5 to 6 dollars per page, if one 許すs a 選び出す／独身 error per page (99.95 パーセント's 正確). To 達成する a 率 of one error every four pages (99.99 パーセント's 正確), the costs would 二塁打.

For 経済的な 推論する／理由s, some database editors are willing to 受託する 正確 levels as low as 60-80 パーセント. Such databases are 一般に ーするつもりであるd for searching only, the idea 存在 that when the 文書 in question is 設立する, one would turn to the printed source. But as long as texts are 平易な to download, the 危険 is of course that they will be disseminated and that uncritical writers regard them as reliable source 構成要素. In an on-going Internet discussion regarding copyright 問題／発行するs, the leader of the Thesaurus Linguae Graecae 事業／計画（する）, Ted Brunner of University of California at Irvine, （人命などを）奪う，主張するs that there is 証拠 that texts from the database have been 修正するd for 明確な／細部 目的s and then disseminated.

In many countries, codes of 法律 are now 存在 published electronically. It is rather 平易な to imagine new forms of computer 罪，犯罪 現れるing as a result. For instance, 裁判官s will perhaps no longer make 言及／関連 to printed 法令s, relying instead on computer databases. It will then be 必須の to 安全な・保証する texts from 偽造.

Presently, CD-ROM is considered 公正に／かなり 安全な・保証する since it is a "read-only" medium and thus cannot be changed. However, for unlawful 目的s, it would not be too difficult to copy the CD の上に a large hard disk, change a paragraph or two and then make a new CD-ROM. The costs for CD-ROM 捏造／製作 have 拒絶する／低下するd 大幅に.

There are 解答s, however. A 汚染するd text can "purify" itself with the help of special corrective codes. Electronic 調印（する）s can 保証（人） that a text 適合するs with the 初めの. Such 調印（する）s link 確かな 封鎖するs of text to 確かな checksums. If a text suddenly 追加するs up to the wrong checksum, then the text has been tampered with and is not to be 信用d.

A more difficult 仕事 is to define what an electronic 出版（物） really is or is not. What is a 選び出す／独身 copy of an electronic 出版（物）? And what would 構成する an electronic 版?

The Online 定期刊行物 of 臨床の 裁判，公判s, for instance, has no 問題／発行するs. The 定期刊行物 changes organically with each article 追加するd or 削除するd. There are no 支援する 問題／発行するs and no lost 問題／発行するs. How does such a 出版（物） fit in with ordinary とじ込み／提出するing 決まりきった仕事s at a library?

Large dailies are now ますます beginning to 古記録 their own articles digitally in databases instead of on paper clippings. Since most newspaper 生産／産物 is now computerized, the most 効果的な method is to create a "tap 穴を開ける" in some 行う／開催する／段階 of the 生産／産物 過程, 逮捕（する）ing the text and saving it.

The 危険 then is that changes or 騒動s that occur after the" （電話線からの）盗聴" will not be 反映するd in the とじ込み／提出するing. Thus, one article might not be published at all or it might be published in another 見解／翻訳／版, but still be とじ込み／提出するd as published at a 確かな date in the 見解／翻訳／版 that was never used. A physical paper clipping is undoubtedly stronger proof of 出版（物） than a computer とじ込み／提出する is.

But, of course, paper clippings いつかs also 含む／封じ込める errors and mistakes. Most 新聞記者／雑誌記者s know how easily 誤った （警察などへの）密告，告訴（状） in an 古記録 takes on a life of its own and gets published 繰り返して, when a reporter 受託するs an article as source 構成要素 without 二塁打 checking. With 数字表示式の 古記録s, 批判的な judgment and a high level of 安全 in the とじ込み／提出するing 決まりきった仕事s are of 最大の importance.

Surely, electronic publishing will give new meaning to the notion of source 批評. Many people also believe that the 概念 of copyright must be changed, while others （人命などを）奪う，主張する that 現在の 法律制定 will still be applicable to new マスコミ. A 類似の 審議 took place when television 衛星s （機の）カム into use. But copyright 生き残るd.

Codes and electronic 調印（する）s may 保証（人） authenticity through several lines of 使用者s, but there is not yet any copyright 管理／経営 system that reaches beyond the first downloaded copy.

特に の中で smaller 多数伝達媒体を用いる 生産／産物 companies, there is an enormous need for copyright 解放する／自由な 構成要素. 普通は, 生産／産物s that 利用する several art forms 要求する 多重の 契約s with musicians, artists and writers. But small 予算 操作／手術s must 訴える手段／行楽地 to copyright 解放する／自由な 構成要素. A dynamic market has already 現れるd, where collections of licence-解放する／自由な jingles, ornaments, 製図／抽選s, photographs, films and backgrounds can be 購入（する）d.

Some 示唆する a sort of A-copyright for 従来の 出版（物）s and a B-copyright, with lower 王族s, for electronic publishing. によれば this idea, copyright owners would not lose money since their 作品 would probably be more wide spread. A ra dical 改革（する） such as this would lay the ground for monographs with all sorts of 作品 enclosed in extenso, instead of just short 見本s of text or music.

Many of the 十分な-text databases in use today depend on 構成要素 that has fallen into the public domain. The editors may 自由に ざっと目を通す and retype such texts and 分配する them on computer マスコミ. But there are some 複雑化s here:

If you digitize an old copyright 解放する／自由な 調書をとる／予約する for electronic 出版（物）, for instance a facsimile 版 which an ambitious publisher has dug up and 用意が出来ている for reprinting - no written 法律 is 侵害する／違反するd. But could it be considered morally 訂正する to 利益 from the 努力するs of others in that way? On the other 手渡す, facsimile publishers also 利益 from the fact that they don't have to 支払う／賃金 for the text.

CD-ROM 記録，記録的な／記録するs are いつかs 促進するd in a 疑わしい way. One （人命などを）奪う，主張する you hear now and again is that you will be able to copy texts 自由に from the CD-ROM. But how can those texts be used? For personal use only or for 配当 の中で students?

I について言及するd earlier the 出版（物） of different countries' codes of 法律 on electronic マスコミ. Someone could easily get the idea to publish 調書をとる／予約するs on some 合法的な 支配する under his/her own 指名する 簡単に by copying large 部分s of a text and, if need be, intersperse a few personal commentaries. In form it may be 訂正する, since 法律 texts in most countries are in the public domain, but would it be 倫理的な to 利益 from hundreds of man-years of work done by others through scanning and proof-reading?

Take the Swedish author Strindberg for instance? He has been dead for more than 50 years, and によれば Swedish copyright 法律 his 作品 are unprotected. Could one 解放する／自由な of 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金, publish his 作品 on CD-ROM if, for instance, the 国家の 批判的な text 版 was scanned? No, because in that 版, there are 公式文書，認めるs and commentaries which make it a 特に copyright 保護するd 版. But what if one 除外するd the 公式文書，認めるs and published only Strindberg's own text? These questions are very com plicated to unravel, since copyright must be applicable on さもなければ unprotected 作品 when some sort of "審議する／熟考する 編集（者）の 介入" has been made. Not only are annotations 保護するd in a 批判的な 版, but also the 訂正するd text itself.

In the 審議 on the Internet, Neel Smith of the Perseus 事業／計画（する）, 示唆するs that we might 結局最後にはーなる in a 状況／情勢 where in practice, it will be the errors of a 確かな 版 that are 保護するd, since nothing but the errors can tell which 版 is a copy of which. In other words: I may publish 調書をとる／予約するs 解放する／自由な of 告発（する），告訴（する）／料金 by authors whose work has fallen into the public domain, but if the 初めの publisher can 証明する that the errors in my 版 are the same as the errors in their 版, we will probably 会合，会う in 法廷，裁判所. 訴訟s of this 肉親，親類d are already taking place in the US, which might be a good thing, to 設立する a 合法的な precedent.

On the large computer 網状組織s, 管理／経営 systems for （疑いを）晴らすing of 権利s and いつかs also for 保証／確信s of 文書 安全, 処理／取引 confidentiality and 使用者 validation are already under 開発.

When building such systems one must take into consideration that text is 現実に 輸入するd and 輸出（する）d through international 網状組織s between countries with 法律制定. International 貿易（する） is 複雑にするd enough when we を取り引きする physical goods. 立法議員s and programmers will surely be busy for some time to （疑いを）晴らす out this 事実上の 交流.

公式文書，認める: A 是正 in the above text was made in August 2000. In the third paragraph from the end, Neel Smith is the 訂正する source for the idea of errors 示すing 版s. /KET

[English Homepage]
[Svensk bassida]

Go to [I. The electronic age - on the 瀬戸際 of total memory loss?]
Go to [II. The hacker - archaeologist of the 未来?]

Copyright Karl-Erik Tallmo 1993, 1994.