As Kevin, Mike and John each raised in their (probably simultaneous) replies
to Dan's post - Dan's first several paragraphs about the case are probably
inaccurate, and may complicate the point he is trying to make. The "not a
big deal" order just declines supplemental briefing on the ART Act's impact
on Napster et al's summary judgment motion re: non-infringing ness of
maintaining an index (that's my belief :)
Dan's point that "making available for download" is not= "exclusive distribution right" is worth making nonetheless, and it is a distinction of some legal importance, especially in international treaties and comparisons between various nations' legal regimes. If you read the rest of his post, it contains interesting practical matters (read litigation hurdles) too.
Susan Crawford has a post (including an internal link to an earlier post) about just this issue, and it is also definitely worth reading. http://scrawford.blogware.com/blog/_archives/2005/5/12/842418.html
Ethan Ackerman
-----Original Message-----
From: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
[mailto:CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org]On Behalf Of Dan Ballard
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 1:30 PM
To: CNI-COPYRIGHT -- Copyright & Intellectual Property
Subject: [CNI-(C)] Distribution right vs. "make available for download"
Received on Wed May 18 2005 - 01:30:01 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:55 GMT