View Single Post
Old 03-27-2023, 03:45 PM   #37
salamanderjuice
Guru
salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.salamanderjuice ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 944
Karma: 13014268
Join Date: Jul 2017
Device: Boox Nova 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by Quoth View Post
The court wasn't considering morality, or fairness of existing copyright law, or unavailability of OOP books. It was the quite narrow test of copyright violation. Was a copy made and distributed without the permission (needs to be in writing) of the copyright holder? The IA could never win on fair use on that and an appeal will fail.

Personally I think copyright has been extended too much and there needs to be action about OOP. We need reform and shortening of terms, not unilateral violation.
Considering ripping a CD or recording TV with a VCR is also making copy without the permission of the rights holder yet are both considered fine today after court cases I don't think it's as clear cut as you make it out to be. Obviously IA lost this one but maybe with a more polished argument they could still win on appeal. Sometimes violation is necessary to prove its even acceptable. Otherwise we'd never know.
salamanderjuice is offline   Reply With Quote