View Single Post
Old 11-19-2013, 10:59 AM   #64
HarryT
eBook Enthusiast
HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.HarryT ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
HarryT's Avatar
 
Posts: 85,557
Karma: 93980341
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: UK
Device: Kindle Oasis 2, iPad Pro 10.5", iPhone 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by ApK View Post
Still a little hard to understand, because the primary purpose of copyright is to excessive the sort of control we're talking about. It's a bit odd to think that any one could have any control once any else see it..." because that's what copyright is about by definition: Laws controlling what other people can do with the work of other people that they have access to. The post reads like the concept of copyright has never been thought of.
The very simple (haha) issue here is simply: is what Google is doing crossing some spirit-of-the-law/letter-of-the-law line or not?
Precisely. Copyright is about exactly what it sounds like - control of the right to copy. Saying that someone doesn't have the right to control who can copy a work once it's been published is ignoring the fundamental purpose of copyright protection.
HarryT is offline   Reply With Quote