🚀 go-pugleaf

Karen Alexander  writes:
> dal9c@Virginia.EDU (Daniel Alejandro Lorca-Martinez) wrote:
> 
> > i know this is *WAY* off topic, but I think you may be wrong
> > here.  If a store sells a gun to a fellow like Fergusson, for
> > example, it is Fergusson's decision what he does with it.  He
> > may hunt (which I'm personally against), put it on his wall, or
> > do like he did and shoot a number of people on a subway.  Is it
> > the stores fault?  No, not really, is it...Even though I'm
> > personally against them selling the guns in the first place,
> > but this is not exactly the forum for my political views.
> > Anyhow, I hope I got my point accross.
> > 
> 
> 
> A gun is not an equivalent analogy because the "original" is being
> sold, not a duplicate copy of the gun. A good analogy, for those
> that seem to need one, is:
> 
> Mr. A is selling ten videotapes. He has made copies of his orignal 
> set of Disney movies onto the videotapes. He advertises that the 
> illegal copies of Disney's copyrighted movies are on the videotapes.
> 

Then that's wrong.  I know, its just wrong.  *But* that is not
exactly what is being done here.  Lets say Mr. A is selling used
tapes.  Should he waste his time erasing his movies whan he has
many things better to do?  I don't think its worth the waste of
time.  He advertises the tapes as used, and warns the buyer
that it is his responsibility to record over it (since that is
presumably why he is buying it in the first place...).

Cheers,
Dan

> So, is it okay for Mr. A to sell these tapes? Or is he breaking
> copyright laws? It is not simply okay for Mr. A to sell copies of
> the Disney movies. He is not off the hook by rationalizing that it 
> is the responsibility of the buyer to not watch the movies.
> 
> Advertising and selling copies of software is copyright infringement.
> 
> Karen