Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
True, if the court rules that the usage is "fair use", you haven't violated their rights, but that judgement can only occur as the result of you making use of copyrighted material and then claiming "fair use" as a defence when legal action is taken against you as a result.
|
The key distinction is flexibility versus rigidity. Implicit rights versus explicit ones.
In the US CD ripping for personal use was generally seen as legal from the beginning and didn't need a law authorizing transcoding. When the RIAA sued Diamond, they lost.
In the UK they most likely would've won because there was no explicit right to transcode at the time.
In the American legal system citizens start out with rights and it is up to government to pass laws restricting them. It is one reason why philosophical libertarians (as opposed to the Libertarian Party, such as is) favor small government. Small government = less laws and regulations = more personal freedom. It all stems from the Declaration and the Constitution.
As usual, it all goes back to the greeks and the persians and Salamis.
The eternal debate of politics and civics.