Copyright again ... potentially a serious problem.

Discussion in 'Digital Cameras' started by Eric Stevens, Nov 14, 2012.

  1. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    On Wed, 5 Dec 2012 23:54:46 +0100, Wolfgang Weisselberg

    --- snip ---
    That's nothing to do with what I said.
    And if they haven't already ripped off a copy.
    Yeah, people buy music they have never heard all the time. If
    something new comes on the radio they close their ears so they don't
    have a chance to decide whether or not they want it.
    Buy your definition, the decent people take a copy from outside the
    If they have got money and are prepared to pay - yes.
    The "publishers and labels" buy the monopoly on the reproduction and
    distribution with the intention of selling copies. If they can't sell
    copies because people have ripped them off then they will pay the
    original copyright holders less. But I'm sure you know that.
    Eric Stevens, Dec 6, 2012
    1. Advertisements

  2. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Quite rightly. That's not what I'm saying. But I'm sure you know that.
    They still had a title.
    Eric Stevens, Dec 6, 2012
    1. Advertisements

  3. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    So it's OK to burgle your house as long as the burglar doesn't raise a
    sweat in the process. I think not.
    Rather than do it the easy way but which costs you money, you would
    rather go out and steal.
    Nothing to do with convicted monopolists. You would be quite happy to
    steal from a totally blameless person.
    They lose sum or all of the value of the intillectual property.
    The manner of your arguing tells me you know right from wrong but that
    you don't want to respect it. In other words, you are not entirely
    honest or trustworthy. I'm sorry about that, but there it is.
    Eric Stevens, Dec 6, 2012
  4. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    You should look up the "Yes, we have no bananas" case. The tune was
    inadvertantly copied and built into another piece of music by someone
    who had done no more than listen to it. There is no need to steal a
    physical object to infringe copyright. All that has to be transferred
    is the idea itself.
    You really do have a blind spot.
    Eric Stevens, Dec 6, 2012
  5. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Because you are copying stolen property. But I'm sure you knew that
    No law can stop me hearing it if the circumstances are right but it
    may be illegal for me to pass it on.
    Eric Stevens, Dec 6, 2012
  6. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Basically yes, when the details of the various laws are considered.
    But I'm sure you knew that already.
    The biggest one is that you can keep the book.
    We both know that already.
    It's like the old joke "They are all out of step except my Johnny".
    It would make life easier but I wonder how long people with your
    ethical outlook would last.
    Because the copyright law of virtually every significant country gives
    you limited rights to copy but does not give you rights to copy for
    resale. But I'm sure you know that already.
    Eric Stevens, Dec 6, 2012
  7. Eric Stevens

    Rob Guest

    And the song from the "land down under" parts stolen.

    Rob, Dec 6, 2012
  8. Eric Stevens

    Savageduck Guest

    Then there is one of the most costly cases at the time, that brought
    against George Harrison, Apple Records, and BMI for "My Sweet Lord". It
    seems the original melody was identical to the Ronnie Mack composed,
    and "Chiffons" performed, "He's So Fine".
    This resulted in Bright Tunes Music v, Harrisongs Music judgement
    against the Beatle & Apple Records of $1,599,987, plus three-quarters
    of the royalties of "My Sweet Lord", as well as a significant portion
    of that from Harrison's album "All Things Must Pass". The Award also
    factored in the royalty revenue raised from the inclusion of "My Sweet
    Lord" in the "Best of George Harrison" compilation.

    Even Harrison's former band mate, John Lennon had this to say about the issue;
    "He must have known, you know. He's smarter than that. He could have
    changed a couple of bars in that song and nobody would ever have
    touched him, but he just let it go and paid the price. Maybe he thought
    God would just sort of let him off."
    Savageduck, Dec 6, 2012
  9. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    But changing just a few bars wouldn't have saved him. He probably knew

    I thought I had left all this kind of stuff behind. :-(
    Eric Stevens, Dec 6, 2012
  10. Eric Stevens

    Whisky-dave Guest

    I wonder how that works with the Bible I thought it was the Word of God,
    so when did God die ;-)
    Whisky-dave, Dec 6, 2012
  11. [/QUOTE]
    *I* knew that. *Your*:
    | If you look inside the cover of most books you will find a
    | detailed copyright notice limiting your rights as to what you can do
    | with it.
    read like *the notice* did limit your rights.

    But maybe it's just my rather limited English skills.

    I underlined the part of the question you seem to be completely
    missing. Please reread the question carefully before answering.

    Ok, so what does the 'recent' fuzz over the illegitimate
    copying of music and videos teach us --- in regard to the
    contents of books?

    What on Earth made you think that this was my ethical outlook?

    Could you kindly point out where in the copyright law it is
    written that a copyright owner cannot unilaterally (in writing)
    grant any affitional rights to his works outside what copyright
    allows? I'm sure I didn't know about that part ...

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 9, 2012
  12. [/QUOTE]
    So you retract your "The original authors were long since
    dead" part?
    non sequitur.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 9, 2012
  13. Some say he never existed.

    Others would say he let humans write.

    Yet others could explain that since God made the world and
    everything (including the humans), he's got the ownership of
    everything from his creation anyway --- and thus humans copying
    his works is as much a copyright problem as a copying machine
    copying on the button press of the author.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 9, 2012
  14. That's the foundation of your claim.

    If they are you, sure. Not everyone is. Luckily.

    Yes, they just walk into a CD shop and grab a bunch of CDs at
    random, hoping they'll like 1 or maybe 2 of the whole bunch.
    You really must feel clever, reducing music to the top 40 pops,
    top 40 Country and top 40 Rock-n-Roll. When was the last
    time you heard Gregorian Chants on radio? Or Early Music?

    Your freudian slip shows perfectly clear that you know
    exactly what decent people want to do.

    More brain damage? If they had money and were prepared to
    pay, why would they take physical copies from shops? Can you
    explain that or is that just you being contrary?

    Wrong on several counts.
    Their main goal is (usually) making money, not selling copies
    (selling copies is just one means, especially for labels).
    And not even that is a given.

    Please find your way to the Baen Free Libary and read the
    Prime Palaver articles.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 9, 2012
  15. [/QUOTE]
    Wrong. Ask your lawyer to explain.
    I know that you cannot steal intellectual property, since
    it's not physical. You can only steal an embodyment or
    unauthorizedly copy intellectual property, but you cannot
    steal it as such.

    So under which conditions may it be illegal for you to pass
    it on?

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 9, 2012
  16. Absolutely true.
    != stolen
    That *is* the point.
    True but irrelevant. You can infringe copyright, but that is
    != *theft*.
    Not calling infringing copyright "murder" or "terrorism" or
    "theft" --- because these are completely different crimes ---
    is a blind spot?

    Really, DO ask your lawyer.

    Wolfgang Weisselberg, Dec 9, 2012
  17. Eric Stevens

    tony cooper Guest

    While not a religious person, I have been around them. I've never
    heard even the most devoutly religious claim the Bible was written by
    God. The usual attribution is "inspired by God".
    tony cooper, Dec 9, 2012
  18. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    Some years ago I was given a bootleg copy of Photo Shop, complete with
    the numerical key to unlock it. The guy who gave it to me died
    recently and it was just yesterday that I dumped it unused. That's how
    I feel about ripping off.
    You are taking it to a ridiculous extreme. I've stopped buying
    recently but I used to regularly go in and buy music by composer even
    though I had never heard it.
    7:10 am this morning, I woke up to a choral by one of the lesser Bachs
    (I can't quite remember each one). We do have a 'Concert Program' in
    this part of the world.
    The evidence is that many/most of the people who rip off music can
    afford to pay for it but are determined not to.
    Eric Stevens, Dec 9, 2012
  19. Eric Stevens

    Eric Stevens Guest

    ... "the word of God".
    Eric Stevens, Dec 9, 2012
  20. Eric Stevens

    tony cooper Guest

    I am not, by any means, a religious person. I am a person who is
    interested in words, word meaning, and word connotation, though.
    "Inspired by God" implies that a human wrote something, but God was
    indirectly guiding his thoughts. "The word of God" implies a
    transcription of an actual conversation with God.

    "Inspired" gives the writer a lot of latitude. He can claim God put
    the idea in his head, but he can elaborate or embellish on that.
    tony cooper, Dec 9, 2012
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.