[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dvd-discuss] Draft of upcoming article

We need something in 17 USC to say that accessing a copyrighted work
by the owner of the copy is not an infringement of copyright (doesn't
that sound stupid).  Then you could add the five words "for purposes
of copyright infringement".

Richard Hartman wrote:
> That is "No person shall circumvent a technological measure"
> should be "No person shall circumvent a technological measure
> for purposes of copyright infringement".

Seth David Schoen wrote:
> Jolley writes:
> > How do you define "copyright infringement"?  I just read an article in
> > "Information Outlook" (a Special Library Association magazine) that
> > seems to define copyright infringement as reproducing a copyrighted work
> > by someone other than the copyright owner.  This includes reproductions
> > that are fair use.  The article didn't associate copyright infringement
> > as an illegal activity.  It could be legal.
> If you look at the "Limitations on exclusive rights" in 17 USC, they
> say that lots of things are not infringements (even when they are
> reproductions or performances by someone other than a copyright holder,
> acting without permission).  For example, 17 USC 107:
>    Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use
>    of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or
>    phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for
>    purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching
>    (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or
>    research, is not an infringement of copyright.
> It goes on like that: