From the article at that URL:
"...the recording ?100 Miles? was included on the sound track of I Got the Hook Up. Defendant No Limit Films, in conjunction with Priority Records, released the movie to theaters on May 27, 1998."

IANAL. Nonetheless, what seems sensible to me is that the offense here is that the original recording was used in another product subsequently released to a market.

This differs from, say, duplicating a CD for the convenience of keeping a copy in the car or at work while leaving the other home, copying it to another medium or device of one's own, editing the content into some collection of one's own (e.g., "My Favorite Neil Diamond Songs," wherein you include your own choices, applying digital effects to something for one's own use and amusement, soundtracks to home videos, etc. In these cases, the end user of these deriviatives is the one who made the legitimate purchase; that one is only extending the various ways to enjoy the use of it.

This is not the same as producing a derivative work and then selling it to others, thereby profiting from someone's work without compensating, which argument can also sensibly apply to non-profit works which may be distributed to a market.

For my part, I will not be told what I may or may not do for my own purposes with a collection of bytes residing on my own computer when they were obtained legally and properly. As long as what I do is for myself and not for passing on to others who should be getting their own copies, I find attempts to block me from that to be claiming property rights over my computer. They own the rights; I own the box. They don't seem to get that.


[ reply ]

Link to this comment: http://www.securityfocus.com/comments/columns/369/32715#32715