Re: Re: Response to John Eye's June 24, 2005 post

On Tue, 28 Jun 2005, John T. Mitchell wrote:

> This could be simply an attempt to remain consistent with Section
> 1008, which gives immunity from suit over certain reproductions of
> sound recordings but not audiovisual (or other) works.

I doubt it. I'm pretty sure that clause has been in 110(1) since it was enacted in 1976. 1008 wasn't added until 1992. Received on Wed Jun 29 2005 - 02:10:12 GMT