Quote:
Originally Posted by HarryT
Because that obligation is associated with the very definition of "copyright" - the right to control who can make copies. The copyright holder is entirely within their rights to say that nobody can make copies, if that is their wish.
|
It might currently be legal, doesn't mean that it's a right though, nor particularly smart. While perhaps in England, where the tradition is more of a royal grant with no strings attached, things are different, in the US, copyright is historically more of a social bargain.
In the US, the moral concept behind copyright is not strongly held, except of course by copyright holders. One sees this as the younger generation downloads music, video and books from download sites without really being concerned if it's under copyright or not. The movie and music industries were the driving force behind the US signing the Berne treaty. When the music industry went after individuals who downloaded music illegally, there was a huge blow back from the public at large.
There is a very strong belief in the US that information should be available, one of the reasons that the US has such a strong system of public libraries. It's also one of the reason that Google's scanning project, which is pretty obviously a violation of the clear text of copyright law, was found legal by the US court system.
The idea that all books should be scanned and available is a very compelling idea in the US. If it weren't for the movie and music industry, who want other countries to protect US copyrights for movies and music, its pretty likely that someone would have put some sort of compromise to permit it into law, much like the current compromise that allows music to be played over the radio.
It really is a pity. That database really could be a new library of Alexandria.