Quote:
Originally Posted by ZacWolf
It seems so counter-intuitive that the source of the end-result (the electronic copy) should have any legal baring on legality, but clearly it does.
|
I think it's a practical application of the principal that you don't have a right to a better quality product based on your ownership of a lesser quality one. A poor analogy but, if I buy a scratched & damanged CD at a swap meet for 10 cents, that would be worth $10 if in perfect condition, ownership of that low-quality CD shouldn't give me the right to download a perfect copy of it. I bought it cheap knowing it was damaged, so I didn't buy any right to an undamaged copy.
OTOH, that's a little bit of a stretch as the principal has been applied to cover all 'copies from a different source' rather than only where there's a substantive difference. That's why I think it's a practical matter-too hard to draw the line regarding what's a 'substantive' difference.