[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [dvd-discuss] Slightly OT - Japanese copyrights
- To: "'dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu'" <dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu>
- Subject: RE: [dvd-discuss] Slightly OT - Japanese copyrights
- From: Richard Hartman <hartman(at)onetouch.com>
- Date: Thu, 28 Feb 2002 10:00:59 -0800
- Reply-to: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ernest Miller [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Charles Ballowe" <email@example.com>
> > I'm missing something in the law. It may be creating a
> derivative work,
> > the derivative work isn't being sold, the service to create it is.
> The problem is that the subtitles are themselves copyrighted.
> It would be
> the equivalent of - you send a book to me in English - I
> print a Spanish
> translation between the lines and send it back to you. The Spanish
> translation would be a derivative work. Now it is legal to
> have someone
> translate a copyrighted work for some purposes ... but not
> for general sale
> to the public.
Again, it is not the derivative work that is on general sale
to the public, but rather the translation service for a work
which is owned by the client (rather than the service provider).
A technicality, perhaps. But a valid one (currently), I think.
> I agree in the distinction between public and private distribution. I
> believe that Napster was public distribution because you are
> sharing with
> the public, there is no discrimination. Private distribution
> would be with
> close friends via ftp or something, not generally available to anyone.
This was the distinction between Napster and AIMster, IIRC.
AIMster worked through AOL Instant Messaging, so you were only
sharing with people you knew.
-Richard M. Hartman
186,000 mi./sec ... not just a good idea, it's the LAW!