Linked by Paul Cesarini on Mon 8th Sep 2003 03:02 UTC
Thanks to a provision in the 1976 Copyright Act, U.S. law allows the first purchaser of copyrighted material (a book, CD, etc) to subsequently re-sell that item without the copyright owner's consent. In this age of online distribution and the budding, halting attempts at legitimizing it, is the the right to re-sell going to be upheld?
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
...is what I'm doing. Downloading fabulous, FREE and LEGAL mp3s from audiogalaxy.com, mp3.com and any other random sites I find, and then *only* sharing those. I'm sharing hundreds of them and they are fabulous songs that you can't hear anywhere else, and I don't have any worries about RIAA subpoenas. At this stage of the game, the best thing we can do to fight the RIAA is to turn our backs on their stuff, not buy it, not share it, not download it. THAT is what they are really afraid of, people developing a taste for music that they don't control and infecting others with it. They don't care if someone downloads a copy of Fast Car without paying for it, they are quaking in their boots of what comes next, when everybody has all of their crap and wants more, and the p2p services will be used to distribute free and legal songs that they have no claim to. They control the radio, and the tv, and the movies, and the shelves at wal-mart, but they do not control gnutella, fasttrack, gnutella2, blubster/piolet, et al. That's why they are trying to scare people off file sharing services, not because they're worried about protecting Tracy Chapman and her fast, fast car.