Cornell Law
107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include--
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or
is for nonprofit educational purposes; (2) the nature of the copyrighted work; (3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
From my reading, an aspect of fair use is codified. However, it doesn't help much in justifying a backup or rip.
They'll probably get officially reprimanded and get to keep their jobs - I've seen this scenario before.
The government uses contractors, in part, because it's easier to shuffle the blame on them and get them fired without a lot of muss and fuss - no unions, governmental personnel regulations, and such with which to hassle. Further, using contractors enables plausible denial.
One thing to remember, however, is that talk is just talk. Asking someone for permission to commit a crime does not absolve you from the responsibility of the action nor does it make the person who gives permission directly or substantially liable. Prior to your actions, nothing illegal happened.
We've established the wording, not the interpretation. I was asking if you have personally used or know of a citable instance (ie., precedence) where the FCBA was successfully used in disputing a cellular charge?
Obviously, producing a case where it was not used would be meaningless.
A real case would be helpful - speculation based solely on the interpretation won't get us much further.
With respect to the T-Mobile issue, I would agree those come under the FCBA category - you are using the T-Mobile account as a revolving charge when you purchase goods and services (ringtones, joke-a-day, whatever) billed through your account. I'm wondering about actual minutes billed from a service provider - that seems different. Also, you may be right looking at it from an "all-or-nothing" perspective - either the rules apply completely or not at all - which implies they will apply to everything, regardless of source.
Precedence would be very useful - otherwise, only a court would know for sure.
Although an interesting data point, the credit check means nothing really. These days, banks do automatic credit checks when you open an account of any kind.
When I look at my wireless agreement, apart from the legalise one expects from such things, I see little resemblance to my credit card agreements as one might expect if subject to the act. There is no statement minimizing liability, etc.
Again, it just doesn't seem like the same thing. Do you have citable precedence?
Again, I'm not sure and I'm can see your side of the interpretation. The act applies to creditors defined specifically as those
who regularly extend, or arrange for the extension of, credit which is payable by agreement in more than four installments or for which the payment of a finance charge is or may be required, whether in connection with loans, sales of property or services, or otherwise
Suppose I perform a service for you and bill you for said service - payable in full by a specific date. I am not a creditor.
If you do not pay, I reserve the right to charge a finance charge (I lost the commodity of my time in performing my service for you - I should get compensated for the lost interest in that. If you paid on time, I would be earning interest or reducing debt). However, I am not in the business of regularly extending credit - I require immediate payment in full. Futher, I have no interest in preserving the balance indefinitely (which a creditor might). Things are a little muddled here.
Although I'm not sure, I doubt if that applies in this instance. The FCBA applies to open-ended credit accounts or accounts that provide for installment payments over an extended period of time. Service providers usually stipulate that payment is expected in full by the date due with finance charges applying to passed due accounts.
The problem is that on the Internet, if it is unlocked then YES you are allowed in. That is simply how it works.
Now, there's the rub. There isn't common agreement on that point at all. Furthermore, unless you represent an entity designated as the regulator of the Internet, you can't make that assertion with any hope of validity. Rather, "he who has the gold makes the rules." The rules are set entirely by those with the capability to enforce them.
If this guy is successfully extradited, I'm afraid that will represent the rule apart from your arguments to the contrary. Absent international agreements on such things, I'm afraid your tilting windmills.
There is no accurate and meaningful real world analogy for computer network security
"The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48" Analogy A*nal"o*gy, n.; pl. Analogies. L. analogia, Gr. ?,
fr. ?: cf. F. analogie. See Analogous.
1. A resemblance of relations; an agreement or likeness
between things in some circumstances or effects, when the
things are otherwise entirely different [emphasis added].
Thus, learning enlightens the mind, because it is to the mind what
light is to the eye, enabling it to discover things before
hidden.
1913 Webster
If there is similarity, there is analogy. It is a very narrow mind that dismisses an analogy just because the nouns are different.
Apparently, I missed the analyst gloom/doom forecast. I did see this:
Analysts said the settlement would close a chapter in McAfee's history and let the company focus on its market, which is expected to heat up this year with the entry of Microsoft.
Here's their finance info on Yahoo. They seem to have a $4.73B market cap and are currently dead center of their year stock price range.
Doesn't seem that damaging to them, actually - though they are in for a tough scrap when MSFT gets in the act.
Fortunately, Rep. Boucher of VA is on the committee (Committee Members). Of the current members of the House, he has demonstrated that he "gets" it WRT fair use and DRM.
If a patent is infringed, the patentee may sue for relief in the appropriate federal court. The patentee may ask the court for an injunction to prevent the continuation of the infringement and may also ask the court for an award of damages because of the infringement. In such an infringement suit, the defendant may raise the question of the validity of the patent, which is then decided by the court. The defendant may also aver that what is being done does not constitute infringement. Infringement is determined primarily by the language of the claims of the patent and, if what the defendant is making does not fall within the language of any of the claims of the patent, there is no literal infringement.
At issue is the violation of a patent - ostensibly a private matter. It is perfectly reasonable for interested parties affected by a inforcement of a patent to ask that their impacts be considered.
Except... this does seem to muddy the waters a bit...
One could argue there's not a substantial difference in programs (a list of instructions a computer interprets to perform functions), music (a sequence of encoded signals a player interprets to produce a waveform), and movies (a sequence of images decoded/displayed by a player to produce a moving record of an event).
Seems like someone could get very creative with this one in defense of fair use concepts...
* the active region will be on the disk for a couple of weeks and will most likely continue being very active.
* CME's can range in speed and have a delayed effect on the geomagnetic field. Granted, emissions at that point on the disk may not be well positioned for effect, there can be considerable delay in generating storm conditions. It can take many hours - it's a long way.
You know, it's interesting that the MPAA is taking the approach of giving additional regulatory power of the FCC rather than lobbying congress to mandate the flag.
Laying groundwork for easier actions in the future, perhaps...
Ignoring it is part of the dance. A direct confrontation gains the US absolutely nothing and makes the US allies in the region (key trading partners, sources of critical technological components, and large financiers of the federal debt) extremely nervous.
From a foreign policy perspective, either the NK government will collapse under its own self-destructing policies (extreme isolationism, decimated economy, and poor populous living conditions), it will lash out and the regional powers (and the US) will be forced to respond, or there is a protracted brinksmanship dance that preserves the status-quo. Looks like the last one... they're in the "play-hard-to-get stage."
Slashdot Mirror
Cornell Law
107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work,
including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified
by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including
multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright.
In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors
to be considered shall include--
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or
is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is
made upon consideration of all the above factors.
From my reading, an aspect of fair use is codified. However, it doesn't help much in justifying a backup
or rip.
the head of the National Institutes of Health, Elias Zerhounibut
... perhaps a bit of impromptu editorializing?
His name is Elias Zerhouni
... not only will it root your box but, afterwards, the battery will burst into flames.
...
Sounds like an old Mission Impossible episode
They'll probably get officially reprimanded and get to keep their jobs - I've seen this scenario before.
The government uses contractors, in part, because it's easier to shuffle the blame on them and get them fired without a lot of muss and fuss - no unions, governmental personnel regulations, and such with which to hassle. Further, using contractors enables plausible denial.
One thing to remember, however, is that talk is just talk. Asking someone for permission to commit a crime does not absolve you from the responsibility of the action nor does it make the person who gives permission directly or substantially liable. Prior to your actions, nothing illegal happened.
News for Nerds. Stuff that Matters ... Yesterday.
We've established the wording, not the interpretation. I was asking if you have personally used or know of a citable instance (ie., precedence) where the FCBA was successfully used in disputing a cellular charge?
Obviously, producing a case where it was not used would be meaningless.
A real case would be helpful - speculation based solely on the interpretation won't get us much further.
With respect to the T-Mobile issue, I would agree those come under the FCBA category - you are using the T-Mobile account as a revolving charge when you purchase goods and services (ringtones, joke-a-day, whatever) billed through your account. I'm wondering about actual minutes billed from a service provider - that seems different. Also, you may be right looking at it from an "all-or-nothing" perspective - either the rules apply completely or not at all - which implies they will apply to everything, regardless of source.
Precedence would be very useful - otherwise, only a court would know for sure.
Although an interesting data point, the credit check means nothing really. These days, banks do automatic credit checks when you open an account of any kind.
When I look at my wireless agreement, apart from the legalise one expects from such things, I see little resemblance to my credit card agreements as one might expect if subject to the act. There is no statement minimizing liability, etc.
Again, it just doesn't seem like the same thing. Do you have citable precedence?
Again, I'm not sure and I'm can see your side of the interpretation. The act applies to creditors defined specifically as those
who regularly extend, or arrange for the extension of, credit which is payable by agreement in more than four installments or for which the payment of a finance charge is or may be required, whether in connection with loans, sales of property or services, or otherwise
Suppose I perform a service for you and bill you for said service - payable in full by a specific date. I am not a creditor.
If you do not pay, I reserve the right to charge a finance charge (I lost the commodity of my time in performing my service for you - I should get compensated for the lost interest in that. If you paid on time, I would be earning interest or reducing debt). However, I am not in the business of regularly extending credit - I require immediate payment in full. Futher, I have no interest in preserving the balance indefinitely (which a creditor might). Things are a little muddled here.
Although I'm not sure, I doubt if that applies in this instance. The FCBA applies to open-ended credit accounts or accounts that provide for installment payments over an extended period of time. Service providers usually stipulate that payment is expected in full by the date due with finance charges applying to passed due accounts.
The problem is that on the Internet, if it is unlocked then YES you are allowed in. That is simply how it works.
Now, there's the rub. There isn't common agreement on that point at all. Furthermore, unless you represent an entity designated as the regulator of the Internet, you can't make that assertion with any hope of validity. Rather, "he who has the gold makes the rules." The rules are set entirely by those with the capability to enforce them.
If this guy is successfully extradited, I'm afraid that will represent the rule apart from your arguments to the contrary. Absent international agreements on such things, I'm afraid your tilting windmills.
My point is it's important not to dismiss the analogy offhand solely on the basis of their dissimilar characteristics.
Actually, the unlocked door analogy adds to the argument.
Suppose the door was on the dressing room in a department store or a public rest room. The lack of a secured lock implies permission to enter.
Suppose the door was on a shop. The lack of a secured lock implies permission to enter *provided* it was during the posted hours of operation.
Suppose the door was on a private residence. The lack of a secured lock does not imply permission to enter in and of itself.
All of these analogs imply the important factor is not the lock. Rather, the important factor is the understood expectation of permission to enter.
Isn't that the point you were making?
There is no accurate and meaningful real world analogy for computer network security
"The Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48"
Analogy A*nal"o*gy, n.; pl. Analogies. L. analogia, Gr. ?,
fr. ?: cf. F. analogie. See Analogous.
1. A resemblance of relations; an agreement or likeness
between things in some circumstances or effects, when the
things are otherwise entirely different [emphasis added].
Thus, learning enlightens the mind, because it is to the mind what
light is to the eye, enabling it to discover things before
hidden.
1913 Webster
If there is similarity, there is analogy. It is a very narrow mind that dismisses an analogy just because the nouns are different.
Apparently, I missed the analyst gloom/doom forecast. I did see this:
Analysts said the settlement would close a chapter in McAfee's history and let the company focus on its market, which is expected to heat up this year with the entry of Microsoft.
Here's their finance info on Yahoo. They seem to have a $4.73B market cap and are currently dead center of their year stock price range.
Doesn't seem that damaging to them, actually - though they are in for a tough scrap when MSFT gets in the act.
Fortunately, Rep. Boucher of VA is on the committee (Committee Members). Of the current members of the House, he has demonstrated that he "gets" it WRT fair use and DRM.
At least, there's a voice.
From the USPTO web site:
If a patent is infringed, the patentee may sue for relief in the appropriate federal court. The patentee may ask the court for an injunction to prevent the continuation of the infringement and may also ask the court for an award of damages because of the infringement. In such an infringement suit, the defendant may raise the question of the validity of the patent, which is then decided by the court. The defendant may also aver that what is being done does not constitute infringement. Infringement is determined primarily by the language of the claims of the patent and, if what the defendant is making does not fall within the language of any of the claims of the patent, there is no literal infringement.
Um ... what law?
At issue is the violation of a patent - ostensibly a private matter. It is perfectly reasonable for interested parties affected by a inforcement of a patent to ask that their impacts be considered.
Except ... this does seem to muddy the waters a bit ...
...
One could argue there's not a substantial difference in programs (a list of instructions a computer interprets to perform functions), music (a sequence of encoded signals a player interprets to produce a waveform), and movies (a sequence of images decoded/displayed by a player to produce a moving record of an event).
Seems like someone could get very creative with this one in defense of fair use concepts
A couple of points to keep in mind, however ...
* the active region will be on the disk for a couple of weeks and will most likely continue being very active.
* CME's can range in speed and have a delayed effect on the geomagnetic field. Granted, emissions at that point on the disk may not be well positioned for effect, there can be considerable delay in generating storm conditions. It can take many hours - it's a long way.
You know, it's interesting that the MPAA is taking the approach of giving additional regulatory power of the FCC rather than lobbying congress to mandate the flag.
...
Laying groundwork for easier actions in the future, perhaps
Doesn't it seem a little funny that we need a mirror to get a look at this movie?
Better wait longer than that ...
Ignoring it is part of the dance. A direct confrontation gains the US absolutely nothing and makes the US allies in the region (key trading partners, sources of critical technological components, and large financiers of the federal debt) extremely nervous.
... they're in the "play-hard-to-get stage."
From a foreign policy perspective, either the NK government will collapse under its own self-destructing policies (extreme isolationism, decimated economy, and poor populous living conditions), it will lash out and the regional powers (and the US) will be forced to respond, or there is a protracted brinksmanship dance that preserves the status-quo. Looks like the last one
Just avoid taking them through airport security ...
... missed it by *THAT* much"
"Your flight just left
Best quote from the article:
... mutually exclusive.
"If Jeb lands the wing-suit without a parachute and survives--he is going to be my hero," added Cani.
Between the lines:
And, if he doesn't survive - he'll be dead. Hero/dead
OK. We've left it out on the front step if they want to come pick it up.