Re: Apple II Reference Manual ("Red Book")

[fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden)]

In article <8dh1kp$rli$1@merope.saaf.se>,
Paul Schlyter <pausch@saafNOSPAM.se> wrote:
>Depends on your values.  Was it wrong to try to blow Adolf Hitler to
>pieces a few years before the end of WW II ????  Of course, when trying
>to kill people like that, those who want to take revenge on you won't
>bother to prosecute -- they'll just kill you or torture you, if
>they can.

Apples & oranges (so to speak).  However, this is getting *waaay* off topic.

>> I think you'll run into trouble if you start evaluating actions
>> based primarily on whether or not you'll be prosecuted.
>> 
>> OTOH, I believe you're correct that Apple has no interest in the material
>> itself.  A re-issue would have little value.
> 
>Which is the main point really.  If you break the copyright of
>something which has lost all commercial value, and which not even the
>creator is interested in anymore, and if you, in addition, runs
>little risk of being prosecuted for it, you must have the mind of a
>die-hard lawyer if you want to claim it's wrong solely because it's
>technically illegal.

It's not technically illegal, it *is* illegal.  You might think it has no
value to the copyright holder, and I may be in full agreement, but it's
not for us to decide.  Only the holder of the copyright can choose the
disposition of the material.

For example: it is possible, though unlikely, that Apple has sold the
rights for the Red Book to some die-hard Apple II type who thinks he or she
will make a mint issuing new copies of the book.  The trouble is, neither
you nor I know for sure what the current state of the intellectual propery
is, so we can't make an informed decision.

That's why the copyright law doesn't include a "maybe it's okay" if you
think it's worthless clause (at least, not in the USA).  Look at it from
another perspective: if the material had no value, then nobody would have
any interest in it.  Since some people *do* have an interest, the material
*does* have value, and the copyright holders are being robbed.  (That the
copyright holders don't recognize the value, or realize they are being
robbed, is a separate issue in which we can become bogged down for quite
some time.)

>Of course the value of the copyrightesd stuff and the risk of being
>sued if you break the copyright are related: if it's not worth
>anything no-one will bother to sue, but if it's worth a lot people
>will be very eager to sue.

True.  However, this gets back to my original point: not being sued is not
the same as not being wrong.

--
Send mail to fadden@netcom.com (Andy McFadden)
CD-Recordable FAQ - http://www.fadden.com/cdrfaq/ (a/k/a www.spies.com/~fadden)
Fight Internet Spam - http://spam.abuse.net/spam/ & news.admin.net-abuse.email