Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

Re: Public Libraries

Author:Donald W. Larson
Posted:6/21/2000; 10:45:10 PM
Topic:Public Libraries
Msg #:18005 (In response to 17997)
Prev/Next:18004 / 18006

Robert,

With enough legal copies existing across the Internet, it seems to me that Napster could legally do what you are describing.

Let's say the population of Napster users was 100. Let's say that 30 legal copies of a song were transferred to 30 locations within that population. As long as no more than 30 people want the same song for the same duration, the files could be transferred around legally.

With a fast-enough network the current law would work fine.

What seems to be at the core of some of the comments on this DG is that illegal copying is okay because some folks don't like the terms of contracts that music artists freely sign. What's so special about music artists that the public needs to undermine a legal distribution process? I mean if a music artist doesn't like the contract terms, then don't sign the contract!

By extension, some users could feel the UserLand Frontier license is too restrictive, that the UserLand programmers are not millionaires by virtue of their work and thus, users holding those views start distributing Frontier across the Internet to express their dissatisfaction. Where's the difference?

Are the scenarios different because the music industry is viewed in disdain and UserLand in esteem? According to who? What court would distinguish such comparisons? I think both scenarios are the same as far as form. If it's okay for music to be stolen, then software theft can't be far behind.

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:55:27 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.