Re: Law

[toddpw@ugcs.caltech.edu (Todd P. Whitesel)]

Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net> writes:

>     Law must be flexible. The alternative is an impossible enforcement
>load and the absence of law. The idea behind copyright law is that, with
>very few exceptions, it is left to the copyright holder to decide
>whether or not some action regarding the copyrighted material is a
>violation requiring legal action. If the copyright owner does not
>request an activity cease and/or does not call upon law enforcement
>authorities, then, as far as the Law is concerned, there is no illegal
>activity.

Wrong. The activity does not become legal. Instead the copyright weakens
and may be more easily challenged in the future. But as long as the copyright
is recognized by the Law, violations of it _are_ illegal, whether they are
prosecuted or not.

>> So perhaps 'those' are vigilantes, but certainly not pirates.

>     Perhaps they are both. Vigilantes are those who presume to take the
>law into their hands rather than abide by actions of legally constituted
>authorities.

And how would you classify someone who makes decisions about copyrighted
material without permission from the holder of that copyright?

>     Those who attack Apple II archives have no legal authority. They
>are not pleased with the actions of copyright holders or of legally
>constituted enforcement authorities and, so, they presume to engage in
>campaigns of threats and slander with the object to destroy. They are,
>quite literally, outlaws.

As are those archive sites which adopt a stance of "if we never hear from
the copyright holders then what we're doing is fine and legal."

While they may be able to get away with it, and probably won't suffer life
crushing law-suits as a result, unless and until the copyright holder gives
permission for archiving their software, doing it is illegal according to
the law.

Copyright law often seems ridiculously unrealistic, but that is the way it
is, and with the huge bandwagon of people trying to make money off the
internet, Intellectual Property laws will probably get even more absurd
instead of more reasonable.

Todd Whitesel
toddpw @ ugcs.caltech.edu