An occasional copy made for a friend without profit is very like the tree
falling in the forest. Who knows? Who cares? We all bend rules every day.
Free adults can determine for themselves the potential risks and
consequences.
73, Jerry K3BZ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Lux" <jimlux@earthlink.net>
To: "Jerry K3BZ" <k3bz@arrl.net>; <towertalk@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 11:22 PM
Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Antenna Compendium Vol 6
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Jerry K3BZ" <k3bz@arrl.net>
> To: <towertalk@contesting.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, May 31, 2005 4:02 PM
> Subject: Re: [TowerTalk] Antenna Compendium Vol 6
>
>
> > Many laymen and even lawyers labor under this popular misconception.
What
> is
> > intended is reproduction for profit, not the occasional sharing. Of
> course,
> > now an outcry will arise from those who believe the myth, but it's
> > essentially the same situation with music. Nobody is chasing
individuals
> > who occasionally share with a friend, they are chasing those who copy in
> > volume, for profit.
> >
> > 73, Jerry K3BZ
>
> What Jerry is talking about is "fair use", for which there IS a legal way
to
> copy. However, copying an entire article from a book or magazine is
> generally not "fair use". Stanford University has a great website on
"fair
> use", with excellent descriptions and examples of what is considered
"fair"
> and what's not.
>
> The fact that nobody is chasing infringers does NOT mean that it's ok to
do
> it, anymore than the fact that I can run a stopsign without getting caught
> is ok. Likewise, copying music (or ripping an MP3) for a friend is a
> violation. Sure, you can try to rationalize it as "I wouldn't have bought
> the album so there's no lost sales" or "The artist is getting free
> publicity", but it doesn't change the basic "wrongness" of the act.
>
> People who should know better (i.e. college professors) hideously abuse
fair
> use with things like "course packs" and photocopies of ostensibly out of
> print books. Hey, if I hold copyright, and for some peculiar reason, I
> don't want people copying my work, however useful, then that's my
> perogative. You can wait until it falls out of copyright, or beg me to
give
> you permission.
>
> Sorry about the rant, but this is a "hot button" issue for me. You haven't
> lived until you do a search for some information using google, and find
> strangely familiar words (your own) in someone else's PhD thesis, copied
> verbatim.
>
> Frankly, most small copyright holders are more than happy to grant
> permission to reproduce, especially for reasonably sized excerpts, as long
> as credit is given. The real trouble comes in with "entertainment" kinds
of
> things, where the mindset is "how can we make money from this, especially
if
> it wasn't covered in a gross points agreement with the original creator".
> The other sticky one is where who, exactly, has the rights, is unclear
> (maybe you want to use something published 30-40 years ago, and the
original
> publisher has gone out of business, and it's not clear exactly who you
> should ask).
>
> If you don't like how copyright law works, write your congressman and tell
> them so. I find the perpetual extension of copyright term (e.g. the "Sonny
> Bono memorial protect the rights of Disney forever" act) sort of
> objectionable. Pick a term and stick with it.
>
>
_______________________________________________
See: http://www.mscomputer.com for "Self Supporting Towers", "Wireless Weather
Stations", and lot's more. Call Toll Free, 1-800-333-9041 with any questions
and ask for Sherman, W2FLA.
_______________________________________________
TowerTalk mailing list
TowerTalk@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/towertalk
|