Windows Media Player user license extensions

[Matthew Astley]

Perhaps I can squeeze this one in before the ref cries "Off topic!".
8-o

On Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Philip Rowlands wrote:

> Copyright exists without specific notice nor registration. Without a
> limited assignment of these rights, by way of a license, you breach
> copyright law by using the software.

It's this belief I wish to lay into. I'm hoping you're playing Devil's
advocate here, I don't intend to criticise you personally.


On Thu, Jul 04, 2002 at 11:42:05AM +0100, Philip Rowlands wrote:
> On Thu, 4 Jul 2002, Ken Brown wrote:
> 
> >If you find a newspaper left on a seat in the train, would you read it?
> Depends which newspaper.
9-)

> >If you found a message printed on the page that said "by reading
> >this newspaper you agree to pay WH Smith's 35 pence" would you
> >either stop reading it or go round to the shop and pay up?
> 
> You don't need a license to read printed material, as there is no
> breach of copyright by doing so. Their notice is not legally
> enforcable.

My limited understanding of the recent Sony vs. Messiah (names?) court
case is that it leaves this legal precedent: that you need a licence
from the copyright holder to _use_ a legally obtained copy of software
on a CD.

To anyone not trying to pin some restrictive licence to a set of
compliant users, it should be obvious that this legal precedent is
just a nasty side-effect of a court doing what it considered right by
Sony, in helping them stem the flow of software the naughty pirates
produce.

The need for a licence to "copy" the software into memory is just
wrong, according to what Derek writes of the copyright act. The
copying into memory must surely be covered by whatever principle "fair
use" is called over here.


To proceed to tell people that a licence _is_ needed to run software
you legally own seems to me misguided. To propagate these views as if
they are true will result in pressure to amend the Copyright Act to
reflect the new view - ie. saying it too often will make it happen.

Worse still, even as I ask you not to do this I find I'm doing it
myself. "sofware you legally own"? What law does this stem from?

If Alice gives me a copy of a CD which _she_ made without a licence
from the copyright holder, who has committed the crime? It appears to
be Alice.

What law makes mere possession of this copy illegal? How does this
change when the copy is encrypted, or stated to be a backup?

By listening to or running this illegally made copy, which law am I
violating?


Perhaps I should pirate a copy of the Copyright Act into my naughty
computer, and store an illegal copy in my head for future use.


Matthew  #8-)