@ RobertDDL: Re my post regarding copies for the visually impaired copyright exemption-
Quote:
Originally Posted by RobertDDL
...Yes, thank you, and it applies to her, as she is American. But in this case the issue was not the legality of making a copy, but whether to pay $350 for a used pbook to copy it, or revert to a free if illegal pirated copy.
|
Yes, but that falls under secondary infringement of copyright, not primary infringement. In my own country it is not illegal for a private person to possess an infringing copy (secondary infringement), which in turn means that one can use it. It is, however, illegal for a business to possess one. If one was to make further copies without an exemption or the agreement of the rights holder then that would likely be a primary infringement and illegal. However, in the case discussed one has an exemption from copyright ( remembering one has to try to inform the rights holder that one is doing so, but one does not have to tell them what your source media is).
While I have no doubt that some here would regard possession as a hanging offence good sense tells us that it is impractical to hang the large percentage of the population who possess infringing copies of media and so the law reflects good sense
.
It is also, again in my own country, not illegal for a private person to import an infringing copy (however, it is illegal for businesses to do so).
In the end (again in my own country) if one uses infringing media because of barriers to accessing a non infringing copy (and cost may be one of those) to make a private copy in a form needed by a related or close visually impaired person for no personal gain, whatever the legality that is never going to end up in court. We tend to be sympathetic to such situations.
These things may or may not apply in your countries involved.