Re: use of electronic materials

Trotter Hardy writes:

>What difference does it make, whether one characterizes a
>transaction as a "sale" or as a "license?" I suspect that that
>is not the relevant distinction. The Act does have a "first
>sale" provision in section 109, but the relevant distinction
>there is between the "work of authorship" and a particular
>"copy" of the work. Rights to resell inhere in a "copy" not in
>the "work."

>For what purpose do you want to make the sale-license
>distinction?

Owners of copies may get different rights under section 117 than licensees. In addition, 109 is where we get the right to lend owned copies and the right of direct public display for copies after the first sale (this is the one you need to read the book in the airport). These are important distinctions.

Mary Brandt Jensen       	   "The definition is pursued to its logical
Professor of Law                   conclusion in a long series of cases. 
University of South Dakota         ... We do not pause to consider whether
School of Law			   a statute differently conceived and 
414 E. Clark St.		   framed would yield results more 
Vermillion, SD 57069-2390	   consonant with fairness and reason.
(605) 677 6363			   We take the statute as we find it."
(605) 677 6357 fax		   Benjamin Cardozo, Anderson v. Wilson
CNICOPY[_at_]CHARLIE.USD.EDU		   289 U.S. 20, 27 (1933)
****************************************************************************