Is this a pirate site?

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by HarryT

No, it clearly doesn't mean "you're never allowed to make a backup". It means "you can make a backup, unless you'd be breaking some other law (such as the DMCA) by doing so."

Correct, and in the case of books there is no other law being broken.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

Copyright law grants the holder exclusive rights to reproduce the work in copies. ....

Please provide the link to support your original assertion.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Please provide the link to support your original assertion.

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/

Are you actually trying to discuss something, or are you just trying to start a pointless argument?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/

Are you actually trying to discuss something, or are you just trying to start a pointless argument?

I'm asking the same thing of you. As you clearly have opinions but the don't appear to match reality -- particularly in the case of Fair Use.

You've yet to provide a specific legal reference to back up your claim. Please provide it if you'd like to continue to discuss it we can, but otherwise state your opinions as such.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by kennyc

You've yet to provide a specific legal reference to back up your claim. Please provide it if you'd like to continue to discuss it we can, but otherwise state your opinions as such.

My link (did you actually read it) shows that it doesn't differentiate public vs personal.

Please provide a link that states fair use is only for public use, which is what your claim is.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

My link (did you actually read it) shows that it doesn't differentiate public vs personal.

Please provide a link that states fair use is only for public use, which is what your claim is.

Well I could provide a link to the Library of Congress and ask you the same.

I'll decline, if you can't provide support for your statements wrt fair use I'll just assume they are nothing more than opinions without any reality.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

I don't think anyone (including the industry) really intends to stop such innocent uses on a small scale. But one really should draw a line in not downloading anything from the darknet and (much worse) uploading anything. If the great majority really agreed on that, there would be no need for any DRM or restrictions that prohibit us from doing what we always did with pbooks. Anything that goes on between members of a family and a few really good friends, who cares? Sure, there would still be a darknet, but the people using it wouldn't matter for authors and others hurt by it now.

Don't kid yourself. The industry wants to abolish the legal concept of "fair use" and replace it with a market concept based on what sells their product. Look at Amazon, which "permits" you to allow other people to have limited access to copies of ebooks which you buy - but only if those other people have Kindles. Look at Disney, which successfully got Congress to extend the life of copyright to the point where a product doesn't enter the pubic domain until your grandchildren die. Look at the music industry, where musicians successfully copyright a drumbeat or brief musical phrase. These days, Glenn Miller would not have been able to play In The Mood, because the musical riff it was built on was not original.

Left to its own, the market monetizes everything. Copyright law was not supposed to merely protect the authors and publishers - it was suppose to draw some boundaries to protect the public. Those boundaries are being erased by technology, even though they are still on the books, legally.

The industry does not believe in "small scale innocent uses." It wants to capture every half penny of such use. What really defends us from the industry is practicality, not the good will of the industry.

[Harmon]

Originally Posted by kennyc

All criminals believe they are right in what they do, or they would not do it.

That's not even wrong.

[DawnFalcon]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

You just noticed?

No, but it finally edged passed the "ohhaiitauntu" point to "oh he's a fanatic"

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by kennyc

Well I could provide a link to the Library of Congress and ask you the same.

I'll decline, if you can't provide support for your statements wrt fair use I'll just assume they are nothing more than opinions without any reality.

The link was to the text of Copyright Law, I'd think that would be fairly useful in a discussion about what copyright law says. When you say you'll decline to read it, what you're saying is that you don't actually know what copyright law says?

Read Chapter 1 Section 106 (Exclusive Rights) and Section 107 (Fair Use), if that's all you can be bothered to understand. For somebody who likes to argue with others about what copyright law says, you'd think you would want to actually know something about it (unless that wouldn't serve your purposes).

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by HansTWN

But one really should draw a line in not downloading anything from the darknet and (much worse) uploading anything.

What is "the darknet"? Yes, I know what you probably mean, but how do you say something is in the darknet vs not. You can click on a link on Google and end up receiving material from what many would call "the darknet". Does that mean the line is drawn to include clicking on Google links? Also, there are legitimate things found on file-sharing sites (I downloaded a version of Ubuntu from a torrent site a few days ago). Do they also count as being downloaded from "the darknet"?

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Harmon

That's not even wrong.

What do you mean? certainly they feel it's right for them or they would not do it.

[kennyc]

Originally Posted by Shaggy

The link was to the text of Copyright Law, I'd think that would be fairly useful in a discussion about what copyright law says. When you say you'll decline to read it, what you're saying is that you don't actually know what copyright law says?

Read Chapter 1 Section 106 (Exclusive Rights) and Section 107 (Fair Use), if that's all you can be bothered to understand. For somebody who likes to argue with others about what copyright law says, you'd think you would want to actually know something about it (unless that wouldn't serve your purposes).

And you about law and morals and ethics. Please feel free to indulge all the resources of the internet to increase your knowledge.

Oh and wrt to the above, I expect you to provide the specific wording that supports your claim that

"No, personal use infringement falls under fair use too. "

I don't believe it and see nothing to support it.

Also provide a definition of what you mean by "personal use infringement" I've never see than in any legal document, pleading, law or statement for that matter.

[Shaggy]

Originally Posted by DawnFalcon

No, but it finally edged passed the "ohhaiitauntu" point to "oh he's a fanatic"

I'm thinking "troll" at this point. Where is the ignore function?

[Patricia]

Let us be careful about making any accusations and remember to discuss the issues rather than the poster's motivation.
The posting guidelines are here.
https://www.mobileread.com/forums/faq...ing_guidelines