Re: Psystar/Apple/First sale on Groklaw

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>
> [... utter crapola ...]
>
> Facts:
>
> (1)
>
> http://www.copyright.gov/reports/studies/dmca/sec-104-report-vol-1.pdf
>
> "There is no dispute that section 109 applies to works in digital 
> form. Physical copies of works in a digital format, such as CDs or 
> DVDs, are  subject to section 109 in the same way as physical 
> copies in analog form. Similarly, a lawfully made tangible copy of 
> a digitally downloaded work, such as a work downloaded to a floppy 
> disk, Zip™ disk, or CD-RW, is clearly subject to section 109."

"Lawfully made tangible copy" is one made lawfully.  Which means that
the same conditions for consideration of the copyright holder remain
valid as for physical media being sold.

> (2)
>
> http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Code/Title_17/Chapter_1/Section_109
>
> (House Report No. 94-1476 (Extract))
>
> "To come within the scope of section 109(a), a copy or phonorecord 
> must have been "lawfully made under this title," though not 
> necessarily with the copyright owner's authorization.

The copyright owner dispenses with his individual right to authorization
when he publishes copies for money or other consideration.  For those
copies, no separate authorization is required.

> For example, any resale of an illegally "pirated" phonorecord would be
> an infringement, but the disposition of a phonorecord legally made
> under the compulsory licensing provisions of section 115 would not."

Quite so.

> P.S. Run to doctor, dak.

You are running out of arguments again apparently, and have to revert to
ad hominems instead of which you are not in short supply.

How boring.

-- 
David Kastrup