Paul Serice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Is there jurisprudence on the specific topic of how the fair use
> exception relates to making personal copies?
One interesting precedent I know of. First, there is precedent that
you may make a tape recording of a musical album you own, for personal
pur
Paul Serice <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> But this is not what GPL is about . . . apparently. Apparently, even if
> the original author wants his or her work used in a certain non-GPL-ed
> way, it doesn't matter. The moral thing to do is to disregard the
> wishes of the author and to copy it any
Thus spake Steve Greenland on Sun, May 21, 2000 at 11:55:48AM CDT
> On 21-May-00, 01:51 (CDT), Lindsay Haisley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There are several levels of 'ownership' here. What are called 'mechanical'
> > rights - the rights to the actual recorded sound are different from the
> >
On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 10:08:59PM -0400, Mike Bilow wrote:
> Some copyrights never expire. For example, my understanding is that the
> UK "crown copyright" (a copyright owned by the government) is perpetual.
> The US follows almost exactly the opposite rule, where works by or for the
> governme
Raul Miller wrote:
> First, you really ought to learn to think clearly.
>
> You've assigned the wrong purpose to the GPL.
We have different views on this. I don't think this necessarily makes
me wrong. It all depends on how the future plays out.
Frankly, I hope you're right; I hope I am wrong.
On 21-May-00, 01:51 (CDT), Lindsay Haisley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There are several levels of 'ownership' here. What are called 'mechanical'
> rights - the rights to the actual recorded sound are different from the
> rights to the arrangement, lyrics and music. I can see where record
> com
Simon Richter wrote:
> Anyone who is a lawyer or knows one care to check this? We're still
> talking about a gpg frontend, which will not have any general plugins --
> just crypto ones.
>
I'll check into it in more detail when I get back from a business trip
(Thursday). Does someone need the ans
On Sun, May 21, 2000 at 01:51:16AM -0500, Lindsay Haisley wrote:
> > I think the recording industry is trying to purchase (or has recently
> > purchased) a law that satisfies this insistence. The gist I got was that the
> > law would make all work they publish will be considered a work for hire.
>
Thus spake Brian Ristuccia on Sun, May 21, 2000 at 01:12:06AM CDT
> On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 12:36:47PM -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote:
> > Seth David Schoen writes:
> >
> > > accreted on top of the copyright system, so that authors have become
> > > quite insistent about their absolute "ownership"
On Sat, May 20, 2000 at 12:36:47PM -0700, Seth David Schoen wrote:
> Seth David Schoen writes:
>
> > accreted on top of the copyright system, so that authors have become
> > quite insistent about their absolute "ownership" of their work, and
>
> I should probably say that agents and publishers ha
10 matches
Mail list logo
