Quote:
Originally Posted by pruss
In the case of copying of an entire book, it is typically false that the copyright owner has "invited" the reader "to see such a work ... free of charge".
|
However, once a book is paid for or otherwise legally acquired, it is readable, free of charge, as many times as the owner likes. Format-shifting should be just as legal as taping a TV show.
Quote:
|
The closest realistic analogy to time-shifting of TV programs would be if you borrow a book from the library, don't have time to finish it before you need to return it, and you copy the book, and then destroy your copy as soon as you finish reading it.
|
Why destroy it? You're not required to wipe your videotaped shows when you're done watching them.
Quote:
|
But even that doesn't seem to me like a very good analogy, because unlike a TV broadcast, the book is intended to be read at one location at a time, while in my scenario you are potentially reading the copy at the same time as another patron of the library is reading the returned original.
|
There is also format-shifting. I am not sure courts have ruled on that. But I would be surprised if it would be allowed in cases where the original and copy are had by different owners.[/QUOTE]
Broadcasting is different from individual copy sharing, but I can see parallels. A TV show is broadcast once (let's pretend we're living in 1972) to millions of viewers, and ownership & distribution rights are maintained by the studio. However, anyone who applied VCR tech at the right time now has an extra copy, viewable many times, potentially by many people (maybe he invites the whole family over to watch the Simpsons Halloween specials). It's being viewed by people who didn't use access to the original when they had the opportunity.
The library book, which someone copies, now has the chance of its content being read by two people at the same time. I don't see a lot of difference between that and sharing a TV episode later.