[ExtractStream] Re: My dangerous idea.

[Jonathan C. Brewer]

how does this all work when you're JUST talking about
regular broadcast? I don't have cable or dish,
and just get my free TV delivered to my TIVO.
Is that stuff also copyrighted? Will Mr. Rogers
sue me for making copies of his show that he gave
to me for free over the airwaves? (j/k)

-Jonathan

-----Original Message-----
From: sharkey@a...
[mailto:sharkey@a...]
Sent: Friday, June 29, 2001 2:28 PM
To: ExtractStream@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [ExtractStream] Re: My dangerous idea. 


> At 1:19 pm -0400 6/29/01, sharkey@a... wrote:
> >there really are no restrictions
> >on non-profit activities such as public/private library lending
> 
> I promise I'll minimize the copyright law angle after this but it is 
> a point from the book "Digital Copyright" that I found most 
> interesting. When people are asked what they think the current 
> copyright law involves they will almost always include a comment like 
> the one above. It was certainly part of my thinking. But the author 
> says in no uncertain terms that whether there is payment involved or 
> not makes no difference in actual copyright law when determining 
> infringement.

Here you're just wrong. It *does* make a difference whether or not money
is changing hands in some cases.

One of the greatest things about the web is that the text of the laws
itself is online, and anyone with a web browser has access to an effective
law library.

I'll cite U.S. title 17, paragraph 107:

[T]he fair use of a copyrighted work [..] is not an infringement of
copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular
case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include [..]
the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is
of a commercial nature[.]

(http://www.loc.gov/copyright/title17/92chap1.html#107)

If you're trying to defend a particular action as fair use, making money
off the use really works against you, although that by itself doesn't
negate a fair use defense.

Paragraph 110 is perhaps even more relevent to this particular application.

[T]he following are not infringements of copyright:
[..]
communication of a transmission embodying a performance or display of a
work by the public reception of the transmission on a single receiving
apparatus of a kind commonly used in private homes, unless -
(i) a direct charge is made to see or hear the transmission

So, money changing hands is very much included in copyright law.

Eric

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
ExtractStream-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com



Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/