home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: misc.legal.computing
- Path: sparky!uunet!psinntp!panix!sbarber
- From: sbarber@panix.com (Steve Barber)
- Subject: Re: DOS Format: Does it infringe Copywrite Laws?
- Message-ID: <1992Nov22.203519.5262@panix.com>
- Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 20:35:19 GMT
- References: <bhayden.721865941@teal> <8f4n02Ep2bk=01@JUTS.ccc.amdahl.com> <1992Nov19.172309.20014@panix.com>
- Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC
- Lines: 31
-
- In <1992Nov19.172309.20014@panix.com> oppedahl@panix.com (Carl Oppedahl) writes:
-
- >No, this is not quite right. Assuming we are only talking about
- >copyright here (not patent, not trade secrets, etc) then distributing
- >does not give rise to infringement. What gives rise to infringement
- >is the copying, which be definition takes place prior to distribution.
-
- Carl, sir, you are confusing me greatly here. Consider the following:
-
- 17 U.S.C Sec. 106
-
- "[T]he owner of copyright . . . has exclusive rights to do and to authorize
- any of the following: . . . (3) to DISTRIBUTE [emphasis added] copies or
- phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer
- of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending . . . ."
-
- 17 U.S.C. Sec 501(a):
-
- "Anyone who violates any of the exclusive rights of the copyright
- owner as provided by sections 106 through 118 . . . is an infringer of
- the copyright."
-
- Reading these together, it sure sounds to me like unauthorized distribution
- of copyrighted material is infringement. Am I missing something here?
-
- -Steve Barber
- --
- Steve Barber sbarber@panix.com
- "The direct deed is the most meaningful reflection." - Bill Evans
- Nothing I say is legal advice. It can't be. I don't know anything.
-
-