MESSAGE
DATE | 2011-06-15 |
FROM | Ruben Safir
|
SUBJECT | Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Copyright Laws
|
From owner-hangout-outgoing-at-mrbrklyn.com Wed Jun 15 01:57:40 2011 Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-at-mrbrklyn.com Delivered-To: archive-at-mrbrklyn.com Received: by www2.mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) id EC2D8100B76; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 01:57:39 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hangout-outgoing-at-www2.mrbrklyn.com Received: by www2.mrbrklyn.com (Postfix, from userid 28) id DAFC3100BB4; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 01:57:39 -0400 (EDT) Delivered-To: hangout-at-nylxs.com Received: from mailbackend.panix.com (mailbackend.panix.com [166.84.1.89]) by www2.mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CBBD100B76 for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 01:57:39 -0400 (EDT) Received: from [10.0.0.24] (www2.mrbrklyn.com [96.57.23.82]) by mailbackend.panix.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 62C7332E4F for ; Wed, 15 Jun 2011 01:57:45 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4DF849D8.3020607-at-panix.com> Date: Wed, 15 Jun 2011 01:57:44 -0400 From: Ruben Safir User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.2.17) Gecko/20110414 SUSE/3.1.10 Thunderbird/3.1.10 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: hangout-at-nylxs.com Subject: [NYLXS - HANGOUT] Copyright Laws Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030300010509030201070804" Sender: owner-hangout-at-mrbrklyn.com Precedence: bulk Reply-To: hangout-at-mrbrklyn.com
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030300010509030201070804 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
[Tenenbaum] proposes a fair use defense so broad that it would swallow the copyright protections that Congress has created. Indeed, the Court can discern almost no limiting principle: His rule would shield from liability any person who downloaded copyrighted songs for his or her own private enjoyment.... Likewise, his demand for a jury determination on this issue appears all but standardless; "fair use' would, in effect, be any use whatsoever that a jury deemed fair. In the end, fair use is not a referendum on fairness in the abstract, as the Defendant would have it, but an effort to measure the purpose and effects of his particular use against the incentives for artistic and literary creation that Congress established in the Copyright Act.
http://www.wlf.org/publishing/publication_detail.asp?id=2111
--------------030300010509030201070804 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
[Tenenbaum] proposes a fair use defense so broad that it would swallow the copyright protections that Congress has created. Indeed, the Court can discern almost no limiting principle: His rule would shield from liability any person who downloaded copyrighted songs for his or her own private enjoyment.... Likewise, his demand for a jury determination on this issue appears all but standardless; "fair use' would, in effect, be any use whatsoever that a jury deemed fair. In the end, fair use is not a referendum on fairness in the abstract, as the Defendant would have it, but an effort to measure the purpose and effects of his particular use against the incentives for artistic and literary creation that Congress established in the Copyright Act.
http://www.wlf.org/publishing/publication_detail.asp?id=2111
--------------030300010509030201070804--
|
|