Subject: Re: DRM-incompatible licenses
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <>
Date: Wed, 05 Apr 2006 16:31:35 +0900

>>>>> "Seth" == Seth Johnson <> writes:

    Seth> "Stephen J. Turnbull" wrote:

    >> As I understand it, fair use is not a positive right,
    >> prohibiting DRM.  It is a negative right, ie, a limitation on
    >> the degree to which the copyright owner may use the courts to
    >> impose restrictions.  It doesn't say that the copyright owner
    >> must enable fair use copying, nor what the quality of those
    >> copies should be.  (Eg, take a screen shot rather than copy the
    >> PNG, analog rather than digital copies of music, etc.)

    Seth> Actually, in the U.S. statutes, the author's exclusive
    Seth> rights are stipulated as being "subject to" the other
    Seth> provisions for first sale, fair use, etc.

    Seth> So while the fair use provision is written in such a way as
    Seth> to look like a loopy sort of exception to copyright, it's
    Seth> actually the other way around.

How does that differ from what I wrote?  There still is no positive
right to copy, except that of the author.  In the absence of
copyright, there is the freedom to do so, but nobody is required to
help you.

Graduate School of Systems and Information Engineering   University of Tsukuba        Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
        Economics of Information Communication and Computation Systems
          Experimental Economics, Microeconomic Theory, Game Theory