On Sun, 30 Dec 2007 11:22:28 -0500, Linonut wrote:
> * Roy Schestowitz fired off this tart reply:
>
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122800693.html
>
> At the Thomas trial in Minnesota, Sony BMG's chief of litigation,
> Jennifer Pariser, testified that "when an individual makes a copy of
> a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Copying a
> song you bought is "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy,' "
> she said.
>
> These people are fucking idiots. No other word for it.
Agreed. There's a huge difference between copying a song you own on CD, or
legitimately downloaded and bought, for your own personal use on another
device, and downloading a song from someone else's server, that you never
owned.
If you upload the copy for others to rip off, that's wrong. But for your
own use? Ridiculous.
>
> But lawyers for consumers point to a series of court rulings over the
> last few decades that found no violation of copyright law in the use
> of VCRs and other devices to time-shift TV programs; that is, to make
> personal copies for the purpose of making portable a legally obtained
> recording.
>
> Hell, even the NFL lets one use their games "for the private use of our
> audience".
They know they'd never get away with stopping recording of TV. People are
too used to having videotape copies of their favourite shows/films. I've
got videos that are fifteen or more years old, still playable.
There should be a simple rule. Private use should be permitted.
Distribution should not.
--
Kier
|
|
