Reply to Re: Millimeter talks about copyright
If you don't have an account, just leave the password field blank.
Your statements about copyright seem to be a mix of the law and common practices in the music industry. My own perspective is software, so I only know much about the law.
So thank you for explaining things. I do have a question though: as far as I understand the law, it doesn't prevent personal use at all. That means that once you have legally acquired a copy of a work, you do have the right to make a copy for your car and a copy for your home. In software, the only way to prevent that sort of thing is by using a contract instead of a license: instead of paying for a license which allows you some things that wouldn't be allowed under the law, you make a deal with the copyright holder in which you promise to not do certain things that you would otherwise have been allowed to do, in exchange for a license to the work. I don't know if this is also common practice in the music industry, but from your text I conclude that it is.
Another thing I know is happening, is the laws regarding copy protection. At least in the US, it is illegal to break such a protection. Which leads to the strange situation that you are legally allowed, but technically unable, to make a copy (for personal use), and solving the technical problem is illegal. (I think the EU is exactly opposite: you are allowed to break such protection for the purpose of being able to enjoy your legal rights, and you can't waive that right with a contract. This is just my memory though, and I may be completely wrong about it.)
what I write about copyright is not merely my opinion
This is interesting, but I'm more interested in your opinion as someone who works in the field.
You're explaining that watching a movie with friends is illegal under copyright law. I hadn't thought about this before, but it seems to be a correct interpretation of the law. Do you think this is how it should be? Or would you want to see the law changed? Are there other changes you would be in favor of?
And do you think that leaving much power for making the rules with the recording industry is a good thing? Or should there more laws, such as the one I talked about above from the EU (regardless of whether it actually exists
). (A danger of giving them the power is that other sectors, such as software, don't have such organizations, so everyone can make their own rules and personally I dislike most EULAs.)
So thank you for explaining things. I do have a question though: as far as I understand the law, it doesn't prevent personal use at all. That means that once you have legally acquired a copy of a work, you do have the right to make a copy for your car and a copy for your home. In software, the only way to prevent that sort of thing is by using a contract instead of a license: instead of paying for a license which allows you some things that wouldn't be allowed under the law, you make a deal with the copyright holder in which you promise to not do certain things that you would otherwise have been allowed to do, in exchange for a license to the work. I don't know if this is also common practice in the music industry, but from your text I conclude that it is.
Another thing I know is happening, is the laws regarding copy protection. At least in the US, it is illegal to break such a protection. Which leads to the strange situation that you are legally allowed, but technically unable, to make a copy (for personal use), and solving the technical problem is illegal. (I think the EU is exactly opposite: you are allowed to break such protection for the purpose of being able to enjoy your legal rights, and you can't waive that right with a contract. This is just my memory though, and I may be completely wrong about it.)
what I write about copyright is not merely my opinion
This is interesting, but I'm more interested in your opinion as someone who works in the field.
You're explaining that watching a movie with friends is illegal under copyright law. I hadn't thought about this before, but it seems to be a correct interpretation of the law. Do you think this is how it should be? Or would you want to see the law changed? Are there other changes you would be in favor of?
And do you think that leaving much power for making the rules with the recording industry is a good thing? Or should there more laws, such as the one I talked about above from the EU (regardless of whether it actually exists
). (A danger of giving them the power is that other sectors, such as software, don't have such organizations, so everyone can make their own rules and personally I dislike most EULAs.)
