Thread: Fair Use?
View Single Post
Old 06-15-2010, 08:03 PM   #25
Lady Fitzgerald
Wizard
Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.Lady Fitzgerald ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Lady Fitzgerald's Avatar
 
Posts: 2,013
Karma: 251649
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Tempe, AZ, USA, Earth
Device: JetBook Lite (away from home) + 1 spare, 32" TV (at home)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaggy View Post
True, but I haven't seen DRM on a paper book... yet.
Exactly! That's why I'm buying used books and scanning them (the scanning process destroys the original) and will continue to do so unless I can buy the book already digitized without DRM.

The convoluted mess called copyright laws are a product of the lobbyists of publishers. Under the guise of protecting the rights of authors, composers, artists, recording artists, etc. (most of whom do not even own their copyrights anymore), the industry has manged to legislate a stranglehold on consumers. The laws are contradictory, confusing, constantly changing and lagging behind current technology. Prosecution is subjectively judged case by case. One person may be convicted for something and another gets off scot free for doing exactly the same thing.

For example, the law states one can make a personal copy of most media for back up purposes yet, if the original is DRM encumbered, it is illegal to defeat it. Where the ability to allow only one copy is behind current technology is, if backing up to a digital copy, one should never rely on only one backup copy since they are so volatile. I keep at least one back up of everything on my computer locally and another in the cloud. The odds of losing all three locations at once are too unlikely to be worth worrying about but the possibility of losing one or two locations simultaneously is possible. The company that keeps my backups online could go belly up. My computer could crash. My home could burn, taking out both my computer and the backup. Same if my house gets burgled and the crook gets away with both my computer and my backups. Insurance will replace the hardware but not the data. Sadly, copyright laws have not kept up with that need. Of course, the publishers would prefer we buy extra copies of their media for backups.

Then there is the licensing nonsense. Now you have to pay to use a product but never get to own it. You have to agree to give up your right to keep a backup, you may be restricted to use the media you are paying for only on certain devices, and/or you may lose the right to lose the media you paid for if you decide to quit paying ransom (membership fees, etc.) for it.

The only thing "copyright protection" does is force honest people to become dishonest.
Lady Fitzgerald is offline   Reply With Quote