asdfdfdf
@xtraport.net
| reply to questionguy6
Re: LMAO!
I'm not a lawyer.
There is the first sale doctrine
"..the owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the possession of that copy or phonorecord."
There is a distinction made between ownership of a physical copy of a work and ownership of the copyright. The owner of that physical copy can lend or sell it, but cannot copy it.
Of course with a physical copy you can't legally copy it and if you sell it you no longer have access to it yourself.
In the case of downloading each download is a copy and does not remove the original copy from the possession of the original owner. There are arguments about extending the first sale doctrine to digital copies, provided the original copy is destroyed. Copyright law will never, however, allow the uncontrolled multiplying of copies. |
|
questionguy6
join:2004-04-29
Brooklyn, NY
|  reply to dadkins
ok, can someone tell me why it's "ok" and legal to sell and by "used" cd's and it's not ok to download music. I was under the impression that our copy right laws were created to protect those who created intellectual property. So if I create something I can sell it and if you get ahold of it and you didn't create it you do not have the right to sell it. So you cannot make a profit off of my work. Now when you buy a used cd the artist does not make a profit the record lables do not make a profit. Some business (kims, sounds, hastings or whatever business) makes a profit off a work they had no right to sell. So can anyone tell me why that is ok and has been for years and why the riaa is suing kids? |
|
digiblur
Got Sipura?
Premium
join:2002-06-03
Louisiana | reply to dadkins
If a human built it.... a human can take it apart. |
|
dadkins
Can you do Blu?
Premium,MVM
join:2003-09-26
Hercules, CA | Just don't update.  |
|
