No one has yet pointed to anything in Title 17 that remotely indicates liability in this situation. The tort question is an interesting one, but the physical object does not become the property of the copyright owner just because his work is fixed upon it. To be fair, I'll give those who disagree an opportunity to point out statutes that indicate otherwise, but until/unless the statuory basis this is found, I don't see how it could be "stolen" property. Who exactly does own the CD?
> I'm convinced there is no potential liability for a *user* of software
> that is *later* found to be infringing. Anyone prepared to convince me
> otherwise?
In a corporate setting, the typical practice is to provide a single set of software media along with licence documentation authorizing a number of copies to be made. If you exceed the number, then there clearly is liability, but only because 17 USC 106 requires you to have authorization to create additional copies. This is the actual origin of the "software is licenced, not sold" idea, and when used this way it works.
However, if you aquired a single copy from another party, the liability seems to be all their's on my reading of the law. As someone else argued, the copyright holder should only be able to collect his actual damages exactly once, and he can clearly do so from the distributor. In some sense, the good faith purchaser is a victim of fraud too. I would be astounded if there is not caselaw on this, but I can think of none.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:49 GMT