On Tue, Jul 20, 1999, Lance Purple <lpurple[_at_]netcom.com> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 17 Jul 1999, Robert C. Cumbow <rcumbow[_at_]grahamdunn.com> wrote:
> >
> > I find it astonishing that so many people on this list apparently
> > believe that the law should be clear and pat and exactly the same
> > for every person and situation, instead of flexible enough to
> > accommodate different sets of facts, circumstances [...]
>
> I haven't seen anyone on this list asking for a rigid Napoleonesque
> code to cover every possible copyright situation; but I think it'd
> be a lot easier for the average citizen if USC 17 107 contained at
> a short enumeration of some guaranteed fair uses, with the list not
> limiting or impairing other possible fair uses subject to the above
> four factors.
>
> This weekend, for example, I went to Kinko's and had them photocopy
> and enlarge six pages from a 150 page library book, for my personal
> study at home. I had to sign a legal release before they would do
> this, because the law does not indicate whether this is a fair use.
> Do you honestly think this everyday situation should require legal
> counsel? Or that it would pose any real harm to copyright holders
> and publishers if USC 17 107 confirmed that it was a fair use?
No I don't, and your point is well taken.
The constructive solution, it seems, is to push for yet another revision of the copyright act, to specifically codify certain uses as guaranteed to be fair. The trick is to find language that would not open the door to abuse.
Bob
Robert C. Cumbow
> Graham & Dunn, P.C.
> 1420 Fifth Avenue, 33rd Floor
> Seattle, Washington 98101-2390
> Phone: 206-340-9619
> Fax: 206-340-9599
> E-mail: rcumbow[_at_]grahamdunn.com
> Website: http://www.grahamdunn.com/
>
Received on Wed Jul 21 1999 - 15:27:32 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Mar 26 2007 - 00:35:35 GMT