In a message dated 8/29/2004 10:46:05 AM Eastern Standard Time, Thelacebee writes:
According to the Copyright Handbook by Stephen Fishman, with deals with US Copyright law: Fair use of out of print works The drafters of the Copyright Act and the Supreme Court have suggested that a user may have more justification for reproducing a work without permission if it is out of print and unavailable for purchase through normal channels. (Harper &Row v. Nation Enterprises, 471 U.S. 539 (1985).) Thus, most courts give users more leeway when they quote from or photocopy out-of-print works. But this does not mean that any amount of material from out-of-print works may be used without permission. On reading the above I still interpretate it as copying for PERSONAL use only - not to give away. Or is that just me? I don't interpret it that way. There is another part of the fair use section that speaks to photocopying for personal use, so I conclude that this section is not just for personal use. The part about quoting suggests that it is actually for things that are distributed. Under Photocopying for Personal Use it says: The extent to which an individual may make photocopies of protected works for personal use is not entirely clear. Individual photocopying of one copy of an article from a magazine or periodical or small portion of a book for personal use-that is, not as part of a business activity- probably constitutes a fair use. Making one copy of a book or other work you already own for personal use also probably constitutes fair use. Making multiple copies of anything, or copying entire books or other works you get from libraries or friends to avoid having to buy them probably isn't fair use. You quote from the Bristish copyright site <<So, it is probably within the scope of the above fair dealing exception to make single photocopies of short extracts of a copyright work for the purposes of non-commercial research or private study.">> Which you interpet as meaning, <<This what we have already said with regard to taking a single copy out of our books for our own use.>> I don't think that private study necessarily means study by the person who owns the book. I think that if I were to give a copy of an article to another researcher for her private study that would meet the requirements of this clause. The US copyright law seems to get more indignant when people are using something for commercial purposes. I am certainly not proposing that it is good form in the lace world to do anything that would deprive an author or publisher of a sale of a book. I think there are many people who can vouch that I am doing my part to keep lace publishing in the black :-) But I am a little concerned that charges of law breaking may be being applied to individuals who are actually within the US copyright fair use description. Devon - To unsubscribe send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] containing the line: unsubscribe lace [EMAIL PROTECTED] For help, write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
