Permissible Copying of Physical Book

[eschwartz]

Originally Posted by RobertDDL

The cover. I really regret the loss of cover art. Like printed books, they just take up too much space, sadly

Music files can contain cover art.

[latepaul]

I suspect that for every popular art form media there are both phases when it is new and ugly compared to what it's supplanting and sadly missed when it passes.

I fully expect to read in a few years of the sad loss to culture of the mp3 or epub file.

[markom]

Is it then legal to e.g. read paper book or ebook together with a book owner over internet e.g. using book-video-streaming (without saving those videos, images or audios for off-line reading/listening afterwards) like we would exchange our pbooks or e-books(tablets) if we were in the same physical room ?

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Well, US law works on the principle of default legality so things are considered to be legal unless explicitly banned by law. Absent a law criminalizing personal use scanning of books it will be legal until somebody makes a case in court against it.

Often, in gray areas, all you get is a lot of fist waving and threats and handwringing but no legal action because a loss in court is worse than looking the other way. For example, under the DMCA it is supposed to be illegal to distribute DVD ripping software yet it is readily available both online and at retail. None of the companies are sued because the guiding precedent from the Betamax case is that as long as there are non-infringing uses, the product will be legal. And with the growing popularity of home streaming boxes lots of people are ripping their DVD collections for personal use streaming. Sueing users risks a fair use finding so the software remains available.

In truth, scanning books for personal use is rare and not worth going after in the US. Given the size of legal purchases any losses from the practice is insignificant. Now, other countries are different: in some south american countries the publishing sector is small enough and piracy prevalent enough that legal action can impact the bottom line.

I must disagree. See the DVDFab ruling March 10, 2014.

(commentary link - http://torrentfreak.com/u-s-court-or...-funds-140310/)

Note, however, this was a default ruling, DVDFab did not contest (or ever have a representative show up in court) so its status in case law is questionable.

[murg]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

I must disagree. See the DVDFab ruling March 10, 2014.

(commentary link - http://torrentfreak.com/u-s-court-or...-funds-140310/)

Note, however, this was a default ruling, DVDFab did not contest (or ever have a representative show up in court) so its status in case law is questionable.

Considering that DVDFab is a Chinese company, I'm not surprised that no on showed up.

Not to mention that the US has a bad habit of arresting non-US people that have produced copying software, even if they don't have operations in the US.

[Greg Anos]

Originally Posted by murg

Considering that DVDFab is a Chinese company, I'm not surprised that no on showed up.

Not to mention that the US has a bad habit of arresting non-US people that have produced copying software, even if they don't have operations in the US.

Agreed, but they could have had a US lawyer plead their case. Anyway I just wanted to point out, that there was now case law against DCMA breaking software in the US...

[fjtorres]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Agreed, but they could have had a US lawyer plead their case. Anyway I just wanted to point out, that there was now case law against DCMA breaking software in the US...

That case was brought up by the BluRay licensing body, not the DVD vendors. They were griping about the cracking tool aspect, not the ripping. There is a difference between them suing and the content owners suing.

DVD rippers are, as I said, available at retail everywhere, and unchallenged. With the DeCSS code out everywhere it is pointless to sue over the cracking tool and the studios don't care enough to sue over the ripping use.

[murg]

Originally Posted by Ralph Sir Edward

Agreed, but they could have had a US lawyer plead their case. Anyway I just wanted to point out, that there was now case law against DCMA breaking software in the US...

Why would they go to the expense? Especially as they probably knew the outcome? The US government is a lot larger than a small company in China, and it isn't easy running and funding a court case in another country, especially a court case that it going to rely on a constitutional aspect.

[Ghitulescu]

Originally Posted by eschwartz

Well, not in all jurisdictions I guess. The U.S. however delights in being extra-restrictive (well we do have more people) and is particularly prone to lobbying especially.

Population is not a criterion. Think that EU has double, URSS more, or probably the best counter-example, China

[Ghitulescu]

Originally Posted by HarryT

I may certainly be wrong, but that's not my recollection of the US law. Perhaps someone else knows?

You're not wrong.
What eschwartz knows is another thing, has to do with academic research.

[Ghitulescu]

Originally Posted by fjtorres

Protecting new ideas and methods is what *patents* are for.
Copyright is for protecting specific expressions of those ideas or methods.

A truly new and superior algorithm for digitally encoding audio would be patentable, not copyrightable. The software implementing that algorithm and the files they produced would be copyrightable.

Originally Posted by HarryT

It may or may not be patentable, depending on the jurisdiction. "Pure" software patents are almost never granted by the UK Patent Office, for example. In order to be patentable in the UK, a computer program has to be part of a solution to a "technical problem". A data compression algorithm used as part of a more efficient system for transmitting audio from one place to another probably would be patentable, for example, but the algorithm in isolation wouldn't be.

See how the things depend on the jurisdiction?

In 1980 IIRC the Supreme Court of the US granted that any product of the human mind may be patentable - thus abstract algorithms.

The UK provision is an adaptation to the local law of the EPC provisions - that an algorithm per se is a business method, id est something that can work only inside the brain, thus lacking any technical effect a patent is supposed to have, thus not patentable.
But since the algorithms are usually implemented "inside" a computer (or controller) and they have a technical effect (eg you press the button P+, the controller inside the remote controller runs an algorithm and interprets it as PROG +, sends the code via IR to the TV set, and this changes the channel = technical effect) this is no restriction. Pure algorithms are rare, and practically nobody spends money and research on them - everyone wants something tangible (the church/religion is a notable exception the technical effect of the afterlife was not yet proven ).

[Turtle91]

I actually asked this question in another thread about which scanning companies are the best. I didn't see this thread until too late.


The million dollar question: What rights do I have as an individual if I DO format shift (assuming it's legal)? Do the rights of the pbook (lending/donating) still apply, or do those rights revert to the ebook "license"??

For example: I scan a book that I purchased...I destroy the original (although I might not need to)...can I let my kids and family read it as long as it is only one person at a time and ensure no copies are made... and then donate it to my local library when I have no further use for it?? -- or -- do my ownership rights magically transform into a "license"

Cheers,

[HarryT]

The rights stay with the original paper book, not with the ebook. You can give away or sell the paper book, but if you do so you must of course destroy all your copies of the ebook. You have no right to lend anyone the ebook - it's your personal "backup copy".

[Turtle91]

Originally Posted by HarryT

The rights stay with the original paper book, not with the ebook. You can give away or sell the paper book, but if you do so you must of course destroy all your copies of the ebook. You have no right to lend anyone the ebook - it's your personal "backup copy".

Understood in the case of making a backup copy - that makes sense. But what of the case of scanning then destroying the original (eg 1dollarscan)? I have effectively format shifted - not copied - to an ebook.

[HarryT]

I don't think it makes any difference. The destruction of the original is simply a method of keeping the scanning costs down; there's no legal requirement for it. You still have what is essentially a backup copy.