VMs: Re: Acquisitions

[Grzegorz Stachowski <greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, 21 Mar 2002, GC wrote:

> private section with read-only rights somewhat
> protects Beinecke's interests, since the file
> can't be saved or copied.  Anybody disagree with
> this assessment, and if so, on what grounds?  I'm
> not out to violate copyrights.

I'm generally very much in favour of this idea, but it's not true that "a
private section with read-only rights [means that] the file can't be saved
or copied", since for it to be viewed by anyone else across the net a copy
is made by the browser/PDF viewer, since that software runs _locally_ on
the user's machine. From there it can then be saved or at least extracted
from the cache by anyone with a minimum of technical knowledge.

You would therefore have to be careful, possibly some kind of disclaimer
along the lines of "these files are available for educational use only and
must not be further distributed or copied" that the user has to agree to
before being allowed in. Because of the way the internet works,
definitions of what is or is not "copying" have become very thorny - some
companies have even tried to claim that placing a hyperlink to their pages
on another website was copyright infringement. Fortunately, that one was
thrown out but it illustrates the point I'm trying to make - in an
ambiguous situation it is difficult to predict how the Beinecke might
react (if they found out of course, anonymity is sometimes the best
defence).

Anyway, it would be best to consult a lawyer on this matter, I don't have
the legal knowledge to make a definitive statement.

As for the copyright issue mentioned by Claus, as I understand it the
Beinecke copyrights the images of the VMS rather than the VMS itself.
Unfortunately the fact that they also _own_ the VMS and steadfastly
prevent anyone else form making copies means that effectively they have
copyrighted the document itself. It occurs to me that perhaps there might
be a legal loophole somewhere here along the lines of - I don't know -
rights of public access to cultural artefacts or something, which might be
used to force them to allow third-party copies, but again a legal team and
probably significant funds would be required to pursue this. Does anyone
know of anything like this?

Regards,

Greg Stachowski
-------------------------------------o--------------=-
greg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx            __///,_    ==  
           \              \   \    o  / 'QOOO0&_ == 
           /              /   |      / 0  )OOO0@#==
          \|              | / /      \__ ,dO0@9" ===
      ....||..         ...\ | \..       `\\`       ==