[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>That's just not so! Your original post started out:
[snip]
>So the discussion was specifically about the content of the AHRA, and then
>you wrote 'other sections that you didn't quote (see below)' and 'here's a
>part you didn't quote' as if Seth were being deceptive (which really got to
>me), and proceeded to dredge up older portions of the copyright law as if
>they were part of the AHRA or somehow superceded the AHRA.
I went to the URL Seth posted (which wasn't the AHRA), and found sections
he neglected to quote. That's it. I never claimed they were from the
AHRA, nor implied it.
P.S. The fact that it's "older portions of the copyright law" doesn't
mean it doesn't apply any more ;-)
>>1) It doesn't have to distinguish whether you own the album or not. It
>>says that the person who owns the copyright to the work has exclusive
>>rights on copying and distribution. That means that to copy it and/or
>>give that copy to someone else, you need their permission.
>
>_You_ are the one who commented "It is *very* clear that copying an album
>you do not own is violating the rights of the owner of the copyright".
These were discussing two different issues. But those statement aren't
contradictory, BTW.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
To stop getting this list send a message containing just the word
"unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
