On Thu, May 18, 2000 at 04:05:32PM +0000, Jimmy O'Regan wrote: > On Thu, 18 May 2000, Paul Serice wrote: > > ) Jimmy O'Regan wrote: > ) > > ) > On Tue, 16 May 2000, Paul Serice wrote: > ) > > ) No matter how broadly you read the "fair use" exception, it does not > ) cover Stallman's actions. "Fair use" applies to copies that do not > ) take the essence of the work. Making a complete and perfect copy of > ) the original by definition is not "fair use." Furthermore, Stallman's > ) purpose in making the copy is not to help educate others on the > ) content of what he copied. > Are you being disingenuous here? I think you may try going further than > the FAQ, and to the actual laws and treaties. I would have thought it was > most apparent that the answer you quoted refers to *derivative works* as > it refers to quotations.
For example, on page 28 [1] of circular 92, we find paragraph 107. Paragraph 107 says that (heavily edited, it's long, go read the original) "... fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies of phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching ... scholarship or research is not an infringment ... factors to be considered shall include ... purpose and character of use ... commercial or ... nonprofit educational .. nature of the copyrighted work ... effect of the use upon potential market for or value of the copyrighted work..." I have redirected this discussion (again) to -legal. Jules -- Jules Bean | Any sufficiently advanced [EMAIL PROTECTED],jellybean.co.uk} | technology is indistinguishable [EMAIL PROTECTED] | from a perl script
