Paul Blarmy <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> People who post looking for cracks etc. are quite rightly told that
> this is not acceptable. I agree entirely with that. However, requests
> for DVD rippers, CD music extractors, file sharing programs etc. are
> all assisted even though the subject of copyright theft *could* be an
> issue if these programs are used.
>
> Comments?
>

IMO, copyright doesn't enter into it at all. Software cracks are off-
topic. Cracked shareware or commercial software isn't freeware, it's
warez. Many DVD and CD rippers and most file-sharing programs are
freeware.

"Morality" is even farther afield. I could go on for days about how
unethical and dangerous our current copyright laws are in the U.S., but
that's also off-topic. At least there's some comfort in recent polls
finding that 2/3 of Americans largely ignore copyright.

--
Michael
New York, NY USA

On 24 Aug 2003 17:00:46 GMT, Mcubed wrote...

> Many DVD and CD rippers and most file-sharing programs are
> freeware.

Yes I know, but I posted the original comment mindful of the fact that
there will be times (many times perhaps) these items are used for
copyright infringement purposes.

--
Paul
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"it takes a man who knows no fear, to wrestle with a goat"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

On 25 Aug 2003 , Paul Blarmy wrote :

> On 24 Aug 2003 17:00:46 GMT, Mcubed wrote...
>
>> Many DVD and CD rippers and most file-sharing programs are
>> freeware.
>
> Yes I know, but I posted the original comment mindful of the fact that
> there will be times (many times perhaps) these items are used for
> copyright infringement purposes.
>

So? Where a person has legitimate possession of a legal piece of software,
where and why does it become any business of yours what they use it for?
That's Orwellian "Big Brother" stuff of the worst kind. Good heavens,
what's next - Thought Police? Surveillance cameras in every home?

--
Nicolaas.


- It's okay to call someone stupid - just don't prove it.

Paul Blarmy <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On 24 Aug 2003 17:00:46 GMT, Mcubed wrote...
>
>> Many DVD and CD rippers and most file-sharing programs are
>> freeware.
>
> Yes I know, but I posted the original comment mindful of the fact that
> there will be times (many times perhaps) these items are used for
> copyright infringement purposes.
>

And as I said in my reply, copyright doesn't enter into it. Whether people
do or do not use these programs to infringe copyrights is beside the point.
If they are freeware applications, they're on-topic here.

--
Michael
New York, NY USA

On 25 Aug 2003 17:56:24 GMT, Mcubed wrote...

> And as I said in my reply, copyright doesn't enter into it. Whether people
> do or do not use these programs to infringe copyrights is beside the point.
> If they are freeware applications, they're on-topic here.

Agreed.

However, the original point was to question the premise that crack
requests are frowned upon (rightly so) and software to (potentially)
assist in copyright theft is deemed to be above board.

Shades of grey?

I only sent the post because the above described scenario seemed ever so
slightly ironic to me.

Just realised that this should really have started in a.c.f.d. Sorry ;-)

--
Paul
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"it takes a man who knows no fear, to wrestle with a goat"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Paul Blarmy <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> On 25 Aug 2003 17:56:24 GMT, Mcubed wrote...
>
>> And as I said in my reply, copyright doesn't enter into it. Whether
>> people do or do not use these programs to infringe copyrights is
>> beside the point. If they are freeware applications, they're
>> on-topic here.
>
> Agreed.
>
> However, the original point was to question the premise that crack
> requests are frowned upon (rightly so) and software to (potentially)
> assist in copyright theft is deemed to be above board.
>
> Shades of grey?

Not at all -- it's as black & white as on-topic vs. off-topic. An
enormous amount of freeware sought and recommended in this group can
assist in copyright infringement. (BTW, none of the software you
mentioned can aid in "copyright theft." Theft of copyright would involve
somehow stealing somebody's registration of copyright on a particular
work -- i.e., you write a book, and I manage to get your text copyrighted
in my name. Arguably, this is how the recording industry works, but it
needs only lawyers to accomplish this, not special software.)

A fair percentage of the software on Pricelessware.org can be used, one
way or another, to infringe copyrights, including most of the sub-
categories of "Internet," "Text," "Multimedia," and "Graphics," and
selected programs listed under other categories. I don't see how CD
rippers are any more or less "grey" than email clients, image morph
tools, or word processors. All of these can be used to copy,
redistribute, and/or alter copyrighted material.

Judging from the number of copyrighted articles and images I get sent
regularly, together with the ubiquity of email clients, my guess is that
those probably infringe a greater number of copyrights than any of the
software applications you mentioned.

--
Michael
New York, NY USA

On 25 Aug 2003 19:40:53 GMT, Mcubed <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

< snip >

>assist in copyright infringement. (BTW, none of the software you
>mentioned can aid in "copyright theft." Theft of copyright would involve
>somehow stealing somebody's registration of copyright on a particular
>work

< snip >

Well, as this long thread is already OT, and as you seem like you
might know something about copyright, can you help me with the answer
to the following questions please ? Probably by email as it is so OT.
Though you might consider your answer helpful to others here.

I want to re-publish a book. The original says copyright Joe Bloggs.
Someone says that they are Joe Bloggs and can give me permission. How
can I confirm that ? The book being published 30 years ago would
probably mean their current address wouldn't be the same as when
published. Even if I knew such info.

I want to re-publish. Someone says that they took over the publishing
rights from Joe Bloggs. How could I confirm that ?

Obviously I would be interested in an Australian answer but I suppose
the situation might be similar in many countries due to the Bern
convention (?)

To get partly back on topic, one of the things I was considering was
making a book a freeware download.

Regards, John.

John Fitzsimons wrote:
>
> I want to re-publish a book. The original says copyright Joe Bloggs.
> Someone says that they are Joe Bloggs and can give me permission. How
> can I confirm that ? The book being published 30 years ago would
> probably mean their current address wouldn't be the same as when
> published. Even if I knew such info.
>
> I want to re-publish. Someone says that they took over the publishing
> rights from Joe Bloggs. How could I confirm that ?
>
> Obviously I would be interested in an Australian answer but I suppose
> the situation might be similar in many countries due to the Bern
> convention (?)

There's a great Yahoo mailing list that deals with these issues --

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/copy_rights

The people there are not lawyers but are well versed in copyright laws
and how to research them.

--
I know God will not give me anything I can't handle.
I just wish that He didn't trust me so much. - Mother Teresa

John Fitzsimons <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> I want to re-publish a book. The original says copyright Joe Bloggs.
> Someone says that they are Joe Bloggs and can give me permission. How
> can I confirm that ? The book being published 30 years ago would
> probably mean their current address wouldn't be the same as when
> published. Even if I knew such info.
>
> I want to re-publish. Someone says that they took over the publishing
> rights from Joe Bloggs. How could I confirm that ?
>
> Obviously I would be interested in an Australian answer but I suppose
> the situation might be similar in many countries due to the Bern
> convention (?)

You would have to do a copyright search, to confirm that the person that
claims to control the copyright actually does. Once you found who
controls the copyright, you'd have to confirm with him who controls
publishing rights. In the book publishing business, publishing rights
typically revert to the author (or whoever controls the copyright -- the
author's estate, if the author has died) a year or two after the book
goes out-of-print, though some contracts stipulate that the author must
ask for reversion of rights. So if the book you want to republish is
currently OP, then chances are the copyright holder also controls the
publishing rights. I imagine you would do a copyright search through
whatever government organization administers copyright in Australia. In
the U.S., you would do it through the Copyright Office of the Library of
Congress.

If the book is still in-print, you should probably start with the current
publisher. The publisher can tell you whether it controls on-line
distribution rights. If it doesn't, it can put you in touch with
whomever does (probably the copyright holder).

> To get partly back on topic, one of the things I was considering was
> making a book a freeware download.

That might be where things get a little tricky, depending upon the
material in question. Say the book is out-of-print in Australia, but
still in-print in the U.S. If you contracted with the copyright holder
to make the book available for download in Australia, would you then have
to make sure that only Australians can access the server to download it?
If you failed to do that, can you be sued by the American publisher? I
don't know how that works ... definitely lawyer questions, if it's
relevant to the book you have in mind.

--
Michael
New York, NY USA

On 27 Aug 2003 23:33:29 GMT, Mcubed <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>John Fitzsimons <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
>news:(E-Mail Removed):

>> I want to re-publish a book. The original says copyright Joe Bloggs.
>> Someone says that they are Joe Bloggs and can give me permission. How
>> can I confirm that ?

< snip >

>You would have to do a copyright search, to confirm that the person that
>claims to control the copyright actually does.

< snip >

Thanks for your explanation/answer Michael. Much appreciated. :-)

Regards, John.