Subject:
|
Re: Copyright/Fair use question
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 8 Feb 2002 22:06:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
552 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> If he wouldn't have purchased it a million years, then why would he want
> you to give a copy to him?
Maybe he's broke. Maybe he likes it enough to check it out, but not enough to
procure a copy. Maybe it would be useful, but not useful enough to pay the
asking price.
Incidentally, I once searched for a way to pay a shareware producer ~$20 when
he was asking $50. I thought that paying something was the right thing to do,
but I wasn't going to get $50 of value from it. It was impossible. The legal
thing to do, I think, was to not use it. The reality is that I used it a
few times and paid nothing. Dumb system.
> If you're giving a copy to him because he wants
> it but wouldn't in a million years deign to purchase it, then it's theft.
Well, it's something. Maybe theft...I've called it that in the past. But it
seems materially different in that it causes no harm to the owner of the
copyright.
> If, for instance, I really like your car but wouldn't in a million years
> pay money to buy it from you, does that give me the right to help myself to
> your car?
I don't mind if you copy it.
> Intellectual property rights don't simply apply to the physical
> CD itself;
In fact, they don't apply to the CD at all, but ONLY to the intellectual
property. Our handling of real property is much steadier and easier, at least
usually.
> they pertain to the material contained thereon. The copy you
> give away constitutes theft of that material, just as my taking of your car
> would be theft.
Do you really not see how different it is? When you take my car, you are
denying me some real tangible good and all of the abilities that it gives me.
You are causing harm. When you copy my CD, you _might_ be causing a loss of
revenue, the degree of which is variable. But you also _might not_ be hurting
me at all. You might, in fact, be increasing my sales by spreading my
popularity. I'm not trying to justify copyright infringement based on this
potential benefit to the artist, but only pointing out how different the two
examples are.
> I have a friend who really likes the new Blacksmith's Shop but wouldn't in
> a million years pay to own it, is it okay for me to photocopy the
> instructions and give them to my friend?
I'm not sure. I haven't been trying to authoritatively state a whole IP
stance. Personally, I think this is hard stuff! It's obvious that you ought
to own guns and be a vegetarian :-) But how IP should work in our legal system
is very murky to me.
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Copyright/Fair use question
|
| I see at the bottom you acknowledge that how IP works is a tough cookie, so please take the following questions not as criticism, but as ways to probe the workings of IP... (...) Is it really that dumb? In our current culture, I think that if the (...) (23 years ago, 9-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Copyright/Fair use question
|
| (...) If he wouldn't have purchased it a million years, then why would he want you to give a copy to him? If you're giving a copy to him because he wants it but wouldn't in a million years deign to purchase it, then it's theft. Same with books and (...) (23 years ago, 8-Feb-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
31 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
