| T.R | Title | User | Personal
Name | Date | Lines |
|---|
| 548.1 | Album oddity | CAMONE::MAZUR | | Mon Aug 08 1988 18:07 | 8 |
| I once read an albumn cover ( I think it was Elvis Costello ) where
it said : "All rights reserved. All wrongs reversed."
This does not answer any questions on .0 but the note made me think
of this.
Paul Mazur
|
| 548.2 | | ERIS::CALLAS | Waiter, there's a bug in my code | Tue Aug 09 1988 21:08 | 10 |
| I think you should send that album to me, Jon Callas, at ZKO3-4/Y02 and
I'll take care of your problem. Then you should buy some music you find
a bit more entertaining.
Jon
Oh, to answer your question -- it's legalese, not English. Don't try to
make sense out of it, you'll give yourself a headache, silly. -- /.[
|
| 548.3 | legalese - is that a competitor of rent-a-law? | IJSAPL::ELSENAAR | Home, on a global trip | Wed Aug 10 1988 09:30 | 15 |
| RE -1
> I think you should send that album to me, Jon Callas, at ZKO3-4/Y02 and
> I'll take care of your problem. Then you should buy some music you find
> a bit more entertaining.
Jon,
I went through quite some trouble having this CD from over the pond to my place,
so you don't expect me to send it back at the first person who asks for it, eh?
^-)
But wait: I know a solution! Since you told me it is not English, I can tape it
for you! OK? ^^)
Arie
|
| 548.4 | In lay terms, the explanation | SMURF::BINDER | A complicated and secret quotidian existence | Wed Aug 10 1988 20:34 | 20 |
| "Unauthorized duplication is a violation of all applicable laws."
That's legalese, but it does have a basis in common sense. There may be
circumstances under which duplicating copyrighted material without the
consent of the copyright owner is not a violation of all of the laws
that have been enacted dealing with copyrights. For example, it is
usual to permit, without explicit authorization, the use of short
passages from a novel in a critical review.
Furthermore, there are provisions in copyright law to allow the
unauthorized copying of copyrighted material for limited nonprofit or
educational use unless explicitly forbidden in a work's copyright
notice. These provisions usually state that the copyright notice must
appear on such copies.
The warning message is stating that there are no such provisions in
regard to the contents of the recording medium; any duplication at all
is illegal, period.
- Dick
|
| 548.5 | Copyright period is 100 years after authors death | PASTIS::MONAHAN | humanity is a trojan horse | Fri Aug 12 1988 03:43 | 4 |
| Copying of copyrighted material for certain purposes (such as
criticism) is legal in Britain regardless of nasty words on the
label, full stop ("."). The only limit is what you can persuade
a court is reasonable.
|
| 548.6 | No officer. That law is not applicable. | IJSAPL::ELSENAAR | Home, on a global trip | Fri Aug 12 1988 09:35 | 12 |
| RE -2 (Dick)
>that have been enacted dealing with copyrights. For example, it is
>usual to permit, without explicit authorization, the use of short
>passages from a novel in a critical review.
So, if I understand it well, in this case that law is not applicable, right?,
and copying for other reasons still is a violation of all applicable laws,
right? There are only less laws applicable, right? How do I know *what* laws are
applicable? Mommy! Help!
Arie
|
| 548.7 | | VISA::MONAHAN | humanity is a trojan horse | Sat Aug 13 1988 11:06 | 6 |
| Even worse - the law is applicable, and it is up to court
interpretation whether a particular extract is "short".
In this case the copying is forbidden (since the law is applicable)
but may be legal (if the court so decides). Does anyone know if
the SYS$ANNOUNCE messages are similar?
|