> Yes, http://www.webcitation.org/5iZbZU3o9 or any of the lawsuits against
> file sharing websites.

Lawsuits against file sharing websites are when the original authors/owners 
explicity do NOT give away their work for free.  Of course they are going to 
sue when people then go ahead and copy it.

> In the USA, and elsewhere*, just because a work is available does not
> mean it is okay to copy it.

I meant completely freely available, with the permission of the author.  eg 
when a band or author authorises their song/book/whatever to be distributed 
via the internet or bitTorrent or whatever with no charge/contract.  In that 
case I don't think they would be able to (successfully) sue if someone 
wanted to charge for copying the works.

> Alice the Author writes a book, sells the manuscript to a publisher,
> Bob, who buys the right to print that book. That may be in straight
> cash, or part of the profit, doesn't matter really. Alice still has his
> copyright, because she wrote the book on her time and not as part of a
> "work-for-hire". So, now that Bob's company has permission to print that
> book, they do. Bob starts selling those books, expecting to make a
> profit. Alice might even do a reading from the book for a promotional
> tour, or books on tape.
>
> Now, Eve else comes along, buys a copy of the book and takes it to her
> own publishing house. She makes some quick copies of the book, and puts
> them back on the market at a much lower price. Maybe she makes a
> different book on tape, reading the words herself instead of using the
> recording of Alice. When Eve got caught doing this, the fines would fly.
>
> What you are describing, the object being publicly available,

I meant when the object is publicly available *for free*.  Using your 
example, if Alice decided she would give away free copies of her book to 
anyone who wanted them, or if it was an eBook, freely downloadable from any 
website.  Then Eve comes along and makes her own version (maybe printed in a 
different way, or on a website with some support contract etc) and *sells* 
it for money.  In that case Alice can't go to court and say that she is 
being damaged financially by Eve's actions.

Post a reply to this message