Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!ccu.umanitoba.ca!herald.usask.ca!alberta!ubc-cs!van-bc!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!biivax.dp.beckman.com!dn71!a_rubin From: a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com Newsgroups: alt.sources.d Subject: Re: Charging the net.... Message-ID: Date: 30 Apr 91 20:02:44 GMT References: <1991Apr29.132630.17725@robohack.UUCP> Lines: 106 Nntp-Posting-Host: dn71.dse.beckman.com In mathew@mantis.co.uk (mathew) writes: >woods@robohack.UUCP (Greg A. Woods) writes: >> In article <1991Apr22.192306.29134@looking.on.ca> brad@looking.on.ca (Brad Te >> Brad, if you send me a free copy of a book, I can do any number of >> things with it while steadfastly holding to the Copyright Act. [...] >> it in any work of my own. I can totally destroy it. I can photocopy >> it and put the original away for safe-keeping. ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >No you can't. That's breaking copyright law, and is explicitly prohibited in >the copyright notices on most books. You know, the bit which says "No part of >this publication may be reproduced [...] in any form or by any means [...] >photocopying [...] or otherwise." I think you are wrong here. Copyright law protects the CONTENT, not the FORM. I have no idea whether that clause is enforceable. Besides, the clause preports to be a license agreement, rather a copyright condition. [mathew omissions] >And you can make "fair use" copies of sections of the book. But not the whole >book. Actually, not entirely true. If a textbook is out of print, but still under copyright, you can copy it for use as a textbook. I don't know if that is under the "fair use" regulations, or some other. >> I can give away the >> photocopy and destroy the original. >You can't do that, either. "This book is sold subject to the condition that >it shall not [...be...] circulated [...] in any form of binding or cover >other than that in which it is published." You may be right, although that preports to be a license agreement, rather than a copyright condition. >> Shareware, as distributed across Usenet, cannot exist in practice, >> since the "license" it is shipped with is un-enforcable. >In what sense? It has already been enforced on occasion -- I have read that >companies have been forced to pay up for shareware they have copied -- so >your claim that it is "unenforcable" is curious. I don't think it's enforcable either. It may violate company policy at some companies, but it's not enforcable. Do you have specific examples? >> I would say >> it is even more useless than the average shrink-wrap "license", since >> there is no way you can make me read the license before I read the >> file in my spool directory, thus I can have (i.e. own) a copy before I >> agree to the license. >You have to own a copy of a textual representation of the file. However, >before you get the program you must voluntarily uudecode and uncompress it. >In the case of much PC shareware, the uncompress process displays a banner >message proclaiming that the program is shareware and telling you to consult >the license before running it. >> Also, be careful when you say "complete control over copying of the >> work". What this really means is "complete control over profiting >> from the work". [mathew's response omitted] mathew is correct here, although the telephone directory (white pages) has been ruled public domain -- if anyone owns it, it is the individual subscribers. >> Once something is published, control over use or >> distribution cannot be done. >Again, this is simply not true. There are many cases of books and albums >being recalled after publication because of copyright violation. Examples??? Books that were published in violation of copyright can be recalled (after publication), but that's not what you said. >> (Here I mean distribution of the ideas, >> etc. -- a book may pass from hand-to-hand without restriction by the >> copyright holder.) >For free, yes; you can give a book to a friend. For profit, no; you can't >lend a book, hire it out or re-sell it. Not legally, anyway; again, in >practise the publishers turn a blind eye to people selling second-hand books >for charity, on market stalls, and so on. I doubt this very much. (Haven't you heard of used book stores.) I'm not sure you can lend a book for profit, but you can sell it unless there is a VALID LICENSE AGREEMENT prohibiting it. (I suppose that you can lend a book for profit by selling it for $1,000,000.25 with a buyback guarantee of $1,000,000.) It is not prohibited by copyright law. >Are you sure you're up-to-date with your copyright law? Your references to >"the Copyright Act" leave me in doubt. I'm not sure what Greg means by "the Copyright Act", but you don't seem very familiar with copyright law either. >mathew -- I am not a lawyer either -- a_rubin@dsg4.dse.beckman.com My opinions are my own, and do not represent those of my employer.