Re: Asimov performs a valuable service; so why fight over it

[Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net>]

Supertimer writes ...
> 
> Rubywand <rubywand@swbell.net> wrote:
> 
> >Supertimer writes ...
> >
> >> Let's say a legitamate videotape store has fifty boxes
 ....

> >
> >     Probably. This is actually another case of selling. The owner
> >giving away the old tapes is using them as a 'loss leader' to attract
> >customers.
> 
> Strike that.  Make the example someone standing in front of the
> video store with a VCR offering to let anyone copy the tape.  ;-)
>

     Same thing. If the guy is on store property, he can be removed by
the owner. If he is not removed, it is fair to assume that he is there
to attract customers to the store.


 ....

> >
> >     One moment. You are saying that a court has ruled that making
> >software available is _not_ piracy so long as the one doing it does not
> >make a profit.
> 
> Under the old law...yes and in fact that case was very publicised
> ...the parties ended up on Nightline when the alleged crime
> occured.
> 
> >     The interesting thing about the ruling is that it is a
> >significantly less restraining definition of "piracy" than the one we
> >have been using.
> 
> What happened was the court ruled that it was not piracy
> existing law, so Congress and the President drafted a tougher
> law.  See, the old law did not take into account the Internet
> and BBS systems...the new law makes system operators
> responsible.
>

     Okay; but, there is nothing in the new law as described by you
which modifies the court's definition of "piracy".

 ....

> >You are, however,
> >unlikely to find any program on Asimov with a value exceeding $100.
> >Actually, it would be interesting to have a listing of Asimov wares
> >which exceed a real market value of $1.
> 
> The problem is that the definition of value in this case includes
> the value lost to a reseller.  If Shareware Solutions II or Alltech
> loses $100 over its entire stock of software

 ....

     That is not what your original description of the law says:

> >> BUT...recently, President Clinton signed into law a bill that makes
> >> having copies of a software available for public download a crime
> >> for the system operator.  If the value of the software exceeds a
> >> certain amount...$100 I think...then the site can be prosecuted.

    "A software" and the absence of any mention of "total value" clearly
imply a reference to an individual software item.

 
> AW 2.0 is questionable, of course.
 ....

     No kidding!


 
> Documentation on this law should be available everwhere on
> the net....

 ....


     Interesting stuff-- if you discover the location, be sure to post
it.

     Meanwhile, Asimov continues to exist. Does that tell you something?


 
Rubywand