[PKFFW]

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

This is *exactly* the proper defense--and it is used when purchasing books as well.

I do not research my purchased books (from bookstores, yard sales, or ebay) to decide if they're infringing on copyrights.

I have some that I know were ruled to infringe on copyrights--books where accusations of plagiarism got them pulled from publication. However, the copies I own are still legal. I wasn't required to not buy them--not even if I knew there was a lawsuit against the author going on.

There is an implied authorisation when a reputable bookseller offers an item for sale. I'm not sure the same could be legally argued when an anonymous person uploads an item for free.

Having said that, as I said in the quoted post, I think it would be a defence that would work in the case of downloading a copy of a book or two. I'm not sure it would work as well if you downloaded hundreds of books.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

Receiving something that violates copyright is not against the law. Distribution is against the law. It's unclear where "creation of a copy" falls, especially with all the personal use options that have been authorized. (Not that you have the right to "use" someone else's material, but between personal-use rules, and the facts of how computers deal with files, I'm not sure "creation" of a copy is against the laws at all.)

And this is exactly where it gets tricky and why I don't think it is as clear cut as many would dearly like to believe.

Many would like to argue that the technology means that if I download a book I have never possessed the original and therefore I have not made the copy I have only "received" the copy. However, as has been stated, I have used my computer to compile a copy of the work. Without my active participation in the copying process no copy would be made. Therefore I think it would be difficult to argue no infringment on my part.

Originally Posted by Elfwreck

If you visit a website that has infringing content, it automatically creates a copy of that page on your hard drive. It may be in a folder called ~temp, or it may not, depending on your browser, OS and other settings. If your computer automatically archives to an external drive, it may create another copy of the page. If you periodically burn your archives to DVD, you may have another copy.

Going to a website is a different kettle of fish to actively seeking out a copy of a book. As I've said before, one can always argue the exception to the law. As law is a written thing there will always be ambiguities, loop holes, exceptions and other ways to circumvent it. I'm really not interested in arguing all the exceptions.

I think it should be clear I am talking about the issue of actively seeking out a book from a source that any reasonable person could be expected to know most likely does not have the authorisation to distribute copies and then downloading a copy from that source. I think in that case, if it were ever brought before a judge, it may not be so clear cut.

Cheers,
PKFFW