[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Different Idea... (WAS Re: Net piracy?)
- Subject: Re: Different Idea... (WAS Re: Net piracy?)
- From: jeffr@bmerha2a.bnr.ca (Jeffrey Robertson)
- Date: 26 Jul 1994 15:46:37 GMT
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
- Organization: Bell-Northern Research
- References: <30ud5e$afd@bmerha64.bnr.ca> <1994Jul25.080923.1519@pro-dan>
In article <1994Jul25.080923.1519@pro-dan>,
Dan Brown <pro-newton!pro-dan!danb> wrote:
>In <30ud5e$afd@bmerha64.bnr.ca>
>jeffr@bmerha2a.bnr.ca (Jeffrey Robertson) writes:
>
>>In article <30t27l$oan@lucy.infi.net>,
>>Dennis McClain-Furmanski <dynasor@infi.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>Someone would still own the copyright, even if it wasn't being published.
>>>They would have all the right in the world to thrash you soundly by law.
>>
>>That is 100% correct. However, what if they don't choose to thrash you?
>>Then it's not only justified, it's legal.
>
> You're forgetting something here, which is that copyright violation
>is a federal crime. Should they choose to do so, the FBI can investigate and
>arrest without any complaint from the copyright holder. This is in addition
>to the civil penalties which can be applied in such a case.
Well, assuming this is true (ie that the FBI can wade in without a complaint),
which I don't really know one way or other other, then I still maintain that
you don't really have anything to worry about.
I'm now moving into the realm of the pragmatic, something which I'm always
loathe to do in this kind of discussion, but I think it's about time some
pragmatism got injected here. Does anyone _honestly_ believe that the FBI
is going to care ten cents if someone publishes a _Apple II_ CD? Even if
it had every program (that is not now being sold) on it? They've got real
problems to worry about.
Now, this isn't exactly reassuring to the prospective archiver, though: the
thought that the FBI could hassle him at any time. So I really am curious if
this interpretation of the law is correct. First, has the FBI ever prosecuted
a copyright case that the holder didn't care about? Second, does this jibe
with the interpretation given by Carroll? Right now, I'm taking that as
a baseline for legal interpretations. (Thanks again to the guy who posted it.)
Cheers,
--
-------------------------------------+----------------+-----------------
Jeffrey Robertson | jeffr@bnr.ca | BNR, Ottawa
"I speak for myself, not BNR" - Me +----------------+ (Meriline)
"Verbing weirds language" - Calvin OC-48 FiberWorld