MUZAK is a registered trade mark of the Muzak Corporation. In fact there
are 16 "Muzak" trade marks in the US - for example no 0599782 is registered
for
"PLANNED MUSIC SERVICE FOR TRANSMITTING FROM CENTRAL LOCATIONS SPECIALLY PROGRAMMED BACKGROUND MUSIC TO STORES, RESTAURANTS, HOMES, HOTELS, BANKS, RAILROADS, AIRLINES, BOATS, TRANSPORTATION TERMINALS, FACTORIES, AND OTHER INDUSTRIAL ESTABLISHMENTS THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES" (Please excuse the capital letters.) That one was registered in 1954, first used 1936. I was surprised years ago when I met someone from The Muzak Corporation at a reception at the US Embassy in London - surely, a generic trade mark? - so it's stuck in my mind.
Peter Groves
Bircham Dyson Bell, 50 Broadway, London SW1H 0BL
Direct line 020 7170 0327
-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Mohr [mailto:chrismohr[_at_]sprintmail.com]
Sent: 11 August 2003 18:47
To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: Running Software, Copyright, and SCO
What's a "muzak" CD? (No, seriously, I'm wondering if that's a synonym for "warez" or something). Assuming that a muzak cd is made up of infringing material, the short answer is that it technically isn't. You've violated the exclusive right to copy. If you simply play it on a regular old CD player (I'm assuming that these don't have RAM, but I don't know), no violation because no copying and no public performance. Different facts=different results.
If "muzak"= lawful, then the analysis is different, and so is the result.
With respect to pirated copies, however, you don't need 117 (or a license) to reach that result. If you look at the language of section 109, it only exhausts the copyright owner's distribution right for copies "lawfully made under this title." "First sale's" don't occur for illegal copies.
Second, I would also point you to the remedy provisions for impoundment and destruction of infringing copies--irrespective of who "owns" them. I don't know that a court would order destruction of an entire PC or even hard drive, but it certainly would order that the hard drive be wiped clean at a minimum. It could order destruction if it found it "reasonable". That would tend to undercut assertions of absolute dominion of those particular components.
Cheers
Chris
-----Original Message-----
From: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
[mailto:CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org] On Behalf Of vbel
Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 2:46 PM
To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: Running Software, Copyright, and SCO
> No. I believe what my learned friend was suggesting was the
> minute that one makes a _copy_ of the software, they are
> liable. The "copy" occurs once the program is loaded into
> RAM. So if your point is about possession, you're right.
> But the instant the software is used, 117 does not apply
> because the user doesn't own it.
>
> The music hypo works a little differently.
When you play a muzak cd on your computer, it is likewise loaded into RAM. So, how is it different?
eric
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
> [mailto:CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org] On Behalf Of Bryan Taylor
> Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 11:35 AM
> To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
> Subject: [CNI-(C)] Re: Running Software, Copyright, and SCO
>
>
> --- Kevin Grierson <kgrierson[_at_]wilsav.com> wrote:
> >
> > I've kept my nose out of this for a while, but this makes
> no sense.
> > If you're not authorized to have the copy of software in your
> > possession in
> the
> > first place, 117 is not applicable, since you're not a
> lawful "owner".
> > Otherwise, purchasing entirely pirated software would not
> be actionable
> > against the end user.
>
> Indeed, purchasing entirely pirated software is not
> actionable against the end user under the Copyright Act
> anymore than purchasing any other infringing copy is. To be
> clear, it IS actionable against the person who did the
> piracy, as well as the distribution, and damages for the
> profits would be appropriate.
>
> > 117 was meant to codify what everyone assumed was an
> implied license
> > in computer programs: that you could make a copy to run or
> store the
> > program
> you
> > bought without violating the copyright. Any other result would be
> > kind of stupid when you think about it. 117 was never intended to
> > protect anyone
> who
> > is in possession of an infringing copy, and I doubt that the courts
> > would apply it that way.
>
> 117 was not intented to protect someone in possession of an
> infinging copy only because there is nothing to protect from.
> What 17 USC 106 right does being in possession of an
> infringing copy violate? Has any court ever found the
> possessor of an infringing copy to be engaged in a copyright
> violation, absent other violations? Keep in mind that we are
> NOT talking about the situation where any sort of post-sale
> contract exists.
>
> Dr. Dre was recently found to have infringed Fatback's 1980
> song "Backstrokin" on Dre's "Let's Get High" album. Are you
> suggesting that anyone who purchased that album is liable?
> I've never heard of such a finding by a court.
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design
> software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com
>
> #############################################################
> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to
> <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the INDEX mode,
> E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org> To postpone your
> subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org> Send
> administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
>
> Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at
> <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
>
>
>
> #############################################################
> This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
> To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org>
> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to
> <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the INDEX mode,
> E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org> To postpone your
> subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org> Send
> administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
>
> Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at
> <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
>
#############################################################This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org> To postpone your subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org> Send administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
#############################################################This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>. To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org> To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org> To postpone your subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org> Send administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at <https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
Bircham Dyson Bell is regulated by the Law Society.
WARNING - This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you should not copy or use any part of it or disclose its contents to any person.
If you have received it in error please notify our system manager immediately on +44 20 7227 7000.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:49 GMT