| 1 |
On 08/19/2015 10:39 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 9:35 PM, Michael Orlitzky <mjo@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 08/19/2015 09:24 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> |
| 5 |
>>> When you download software you receive a copy. You start out with |
| 6 |
>>> zero works. Somebody sends you a copy of that work. You write it to |
| 7 |
>>> disk. You end up with the same number of copies as you were given. |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>>> Cite a court case that upholds a claim otherwise? |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UMG_Recordings,_Inc._v._MP3.com,_Inc. |
| 12 |
>> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> mp3.com uploaded music as well as downloading it. Users didn't just |
| 15 |
> upload their songs to mp3.com. They then accessed that music from |
| 16 |
> other computers, so mp3.com was redistributing the music. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
That's just the first in a long list. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
"Uploading is copying. Downloading is also copying. Unauthorized copying |
| 22 |
is an unauthorized use that is governed by the copyright laws. |
| 23 |
Therefore, unauthorized uploading and unauthorized downloading are |
| 24 |
unauthorized uses governed by the copyright laws...." |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
http://cases.justia.com/ohio/supreme-court-of-ohio/1998-ohio-422.pdf?ts=1396139663 |
Archives