Re: PDF files on company Intranet?

On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, Bob Stock <bstock[_at_]mindspring.com> wrote:
>
> On 1/15/00, Steven D. Jamar <sjamar[_at_]law.howard.edu> wrote:
> >
> > Under current U.S. law if I subscribe to a print newsletter, I cannot
> > photocopy it and redistribute it within the company, though I can route
> > the printed newsletter to as many people as I want.
> >
> > But a pdf file is not print. It makes little sense to distort the
> > technologly so much by requiring deletion of the copy from one computer
> > when the pdf file is sent to another computer -- as opposed to simply
> > making multiple copies and redistributing it all at once. It also makes
> > little sense not to allow me to post it to a company bulletin board or
> > webpage for others to come and read -- just as if this were done with
> > hardcopies in a company meeting room or lunchroom or bulletin board,
> > etc -- even though copies will be made as people access that webpage
> > or bulletin board.
>
> Why does it make little sense?

Because the technology online is quite different from that of print and this should be recognized by everyone involved - and licenses should be crafted and pricing set accordingly.

> How is removing a copy of the .pdf file from the subscriber's computer
> distorting the technology?

See above answer.

> One could say the same thing about a transfer of a copy of software.

Yes, but newsletters are different from applications, aren't they. And works of art and games and data files and so on all have differences which may justify treating them differently from one another -- and different from somewhat analogous hard copy material.

Just as posting something on the web should be construed as allowing people to look at it and make at least transitory copies, and, I would argue, cache copies, and even personal copies for their own use -- if you don't want this, require payment and limited access schemes and licenses which explicitly and intelligibly negate it -- within normal limits of the modes of operation of the browsers and such.

> Putting aside ill-conceived licenses for a moment, should people be
> able to keep copies of software, make multiple copies, and distribute
> them? How is that any different from what you propose?

See above. There are differences among types of software which are, to me at least, as meaningful as the distinctions drawn among types of works subject to copyright - literary, architectural, music, graphic, sculptural, AV, etc. -and there seems little reason to me to treat them all according to one-size-fits-all simply because the medium is the same. Music, paintings, and books may all be printed on paper, but we don't treat them all the same way.

> And posting a copy to the Intranet is *not* the same as putting the
> magazine in the lunch room.

Who said it was "the same as"? My point is that the differences in technology justify differences in treatment and expectations of use and that the law and the conduct of people should reflect this.

> On the Intranet, multiple people can look at the magazine at the
> same time, whereas in the lunch room, it is unlikely that more
> than one person will read it at the same time and impossible to
> do it as easily and completely as on the Intranet.

True, but so what? Why should someone who chooses to use a particular technology for distribution of a product not be treated as though they understood the technology and how people use it? Routing a PDF file like routing a hard copy newsletter is grossly inefficient and undermines some of the very aims of the technologies created -- especially for purposes like posting on an intranet bulletin board.

As I understood the query, and I possibly misunderstood it, the question was not as to what could or could not be included in the license, but what would be the default set of rights.

--
Prof. Steven D. Jamar, Director LRW Program
Howard University School of Law                      vox:  202-806-8017
2900 Van Ness Street NW                              fax:  202-806-8428
Washington, DC  20008         http://www.law.howard.edu/lrw/faculty/pages/jamar/

"From principles is derived probability, but truth or certainty is obtained 
only from facts."

Anonymous, taken from The New Dictionary of Thoughts p. 197 (1971)