Re: [dvd-discuss] Fwd: Australian Court rules: Films aren't software

["D. C. Sessions" <dcs(at)lumbercartel.com>]

On Thursday 07 February 2002 20:21, Harold Eaton wrote:
# Temporary ram copies are about as much a "copy" as the image
# on your retina when you watch the movie - if you've got two eyes
# you're making at least one more copy than really necessary to
# view the movie (assuming it's not 3-D).  Similarly, the
# phosphors of the TV screen are also making a temporary copy.
# I can think of no reason to give more protections to one type
# of temporary copy necessary to view over another. The studios
# look silly when they argue that temporary copies are infringing.
# By that logic, any and all use of any copyrighted works is
# infringing.

Exactly!
Therefore, it all requires licensing and can only be accessed under
terms acceptable to the publisher.  Including, for instance, prohibitions
against resale.

-- 
| I'm old enough that I don't have to pretend to be grown up.|
+----------- D. C. Sessions <dcs@lumbercartel.com> ----------+