> Lending libraries don't violate copyright. They do not "copy" the materal. They only "lend" it to somebody. Like you buying a book, reading it, then giving it to > a friend to read on the assumption that they will return it. Or, like a 2nd hand book store, you can sell your purchansed copy to another. In none of these cases > do you copy the material.
You're trying to look at too specific a situation and being too broad in your definition of copyright. Copyright is intended ultimately to simply give credit to the creator of the work and to give them authority over how that work is handled. Therefore if the owner wishes to sell it, then they control that aspect of it, as well as how someone can redistribute their work. This is precisely why we can have material that is copyrighted, and yet is available for free to the public. No one else can claim credit for the work, and no one else can turn it into work for profit, but there's certainly no law against copying it and redistributing it otherwise. Do you really think that copying an IBM redbook and e-mailing to a colleague is a copyright violation? Adam ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
