Re: [ARSCLIST] interesting copyright discussions

[Malcolm Rockwell <malcolm@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Nice. It all makes sense to us, I'm sure, but I'm a collector/discographer.

However
1) the general public could care less about copyright matters.
2) especially the general public under 20 years old.
3) and, given the cost of everything, they will copy and share no matter 
what the law says.
4) changing the laws? fuggedaboudit! (see item #1)

Seriously, information will disseminate no matter what the law says.
One might just as well try outlawing gossip.
Mal Rockwell

*******

Tom Fine wrote:
> http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/14/bits-debate-is-copy-protection-needed-or-futile/ 
>
>
> the whole series if "debates" (exchanges, actually) is interesting. 
> It's very obvious that US copyright laws need clarification. I think 
> the music industry seems to be less "consumer friendly" about this 
> than the line Rick Cotton takes, but neither is ceding any ground 
> about fair use. People genuinely concerned about fair use and what 
> ownership really means should make sure to educate the general public 
> about these issues. I think if the majority of people truly understood 
> the legal limits on what they can do with their DVD's and CD's, 
> whether those limits are practical to enforce or not, they would 
> demand the law be changed to something more consumer-friendly. This 
> would also benefit copyright owners, by the way, whether they know it 
> or not, because it would free up their agendas and resources to chase 
> real criminals like pirate gangs overseas instead of suing and 
> alienating their customers. Just to be clear -- I think a person 
> SHOULD pay for a commercially-retailed entertainment product. I just 
> think what format a person uses that product --  as long as it's for 
> their personal use and not for further distribution -- should be up to 
> them. And I think, given the fragile nature of optical media, 
> libraries should have a clear and defined right to buy and hold an 
> original but circulate a copy. I wouldn't even object if there were 
> technology to make that copy non-copyable by borrowers. The bottom 
> line reason for my advocacy of this practice for libraries is so 
> budget-strapped local libraries can maintain the largest possible 
> collection of usable products (ie not be circulating a bunch of 
> optical media that is worn out and doesn't play properly, as is the 
> case too often).
>
> -- Tom Fine