> Well, once you declare that you don't care about the actual issues, That's not fair. The law says many many things that range from dubious to ridiculous. E.g., that corporations are in some senses people. Are you really about to say that any denial that corporations are people is a waste of time because it doesn't recognize the actual law, the actual composition of corporations today? Or that a debate about whether some people are 3/5ths of a person was a waste of time because it didn't recognize the actual law, the actual composition of people at that time? Or that a debate about abortion is a waste of time because the law answers the questions for us? We know the law is a bunch of rules passed by congressmen and precedents set in large part by hired guns. It is not the final solution to any philosophical problem. Nor even is it likely to be a good solution. The "law says so" sometimes wins in court but doesn't tell us much about what's right.
If you grant that "I'm not getting paid for it" is a sufficient definition of infringement on your licensing rights, then you've made my case for me. A father reading to his daughter is now an infringement. Libraries lending is infringement. Someone lending a book is infringement. A person reading a few pages in the bookstore coffee shop is an infringement. Telling a story from memory is an infringement. And ad nauseum. If that's what the corporations and the AG are aiming for, then let them be honest and say it: our goal is to extend our licensing power until we are paid for every individual instance of every reading, every look, every use of any kind whatsoever. If that's not what the goal is here, then we need to know why an algorithm of one kind is unacceptable while other algorithms are acceptable; why the reading algorithm is unacceptable but, presumably, a base- and treble-adjusting algorithm isn't. In other words, the burden of proof here is on you to offer a conceptually coherent definition. cd --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "R-SPEC: The Rochester Speculative Literature Association" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/r-spec?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
