Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > But I'm not yet clear what your argument for that is. On the face of > it, attaching it to use makes more sense, since who the possessor of a > copy is is really a technical detail that can be changed or made > unclear via technical means (e.g., ASP).
The argument is simple. Making a new possessor of a copy requires *copying*, and is a legitimate thing for copyright to control. Adding a new user does not necessarily involve copying, and it is not legitimate for copyright to control this. Allow me to propose the "What if Microsoft Did It" test. Microsoft creates a new program, and says "you are prohibited from running this program behind a web site for other people without paying us money; after all, this is really a way of trying to cheat us out of selling the program to more people." We would cry foul, right? Thomas
