Hi, On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, J.B. Nicholson-Owens wrote:
> Also, I think it's a valid point to distinguish between theft and > copyright infringement--unauthorized duplication is not theft. They > are two completely different things, regardless of how many people use > the term "theft" incorrectly. I agree, however my point was that the mere act of copying (i.c. storing a streamed broadcast) is not even copyright infringement. Even for that, you need to redistribute the work as well. IANAL, of course. Of course people have the right to try and stop me, but they have no right to prosecute. In other words, I'm legally entitled to try and do with the content whatever, with whatever tools, written by whoever, as long as I don't redistribute the work itself or anything derived thereof. That sounds fair, doesn't it? To bad the DMCA breaks all that. Luckily I'm not affected by it, at least not directly, not yet. That is, until people start to believe it's indeed "wrong" to use content in other ways than the producer intended. IMNSHO, it's not, and I've never seen a *good* reason (taking society as a whole into account, not just a single company's "right" to make a profit, conveniently leaving out that it's actually a right to *try* to make a profit) why it would be. Cheers, Emile. -- E-Advies / Emile van Bergen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel. +31 (0)70 3906153 | http://www.e-advies.info -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
