Re: [nznog] Don't quite get this?
On 2/09/11 9:36 AM, Jay Daley wrote:
or the site supplying it does have the rights to is, in which case the downloader is not infringing because the RH has supplied it to them.
No, I think not. Just because a fruit is in a position to be plucked, doesn't mean you have the right to pluck it, especially if you have to trespass to do so. Example: Libraries are full of books. Therefore, the books are available to be read. They are not available to be copied, however, even though the technology is right there in the library to do so. The RH can give themselves permission to upload their content to the net, but that does not imply that the AH has the right to download that content. Of course, IANAL, YMMV, yadda yadda yadda. ~mark
On Fri, 2 Sep 2011, Mark Harris wrote:
No, I think not. Just because a fruit is in a position to be plucked, doesn't mean you have the right to pluck it, especially if you have to trespass to do so.
Example: Libraries are full of books. Therefore, the books are available to be read. They are not available to be copied, however, even though the technology is right there in the library to do so.
The copying is co-incidental to the transmission. If I phoned up the library and said "please send me a book", and they did so, they would have a hard time arguing that I wasn't authorized to receive it. -Martin
participants (2)
-
Mark Harris
-
Martin D Kealey