rubinass

7 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by rubinass 17y ago

   I don't agree that there are implied contract limits on your use of a CD. I also don't agree that there are normally any express contract limits on your use of a CD. The OP references a letter from a poster who got his terms mixed up. He
2. 2.▲
   by rubinass 17y ago

   It doesn't "specifically" say that. If you read the Betamax case, it's clear that the court was looking at the intrinsic qualities of home video taping devices. Time shifting, for example, isn't really an issue with back ups, recorded mus
3. 3.▲
   by rubinass 17y ago

   They are part of the Code, but courts test what the code means all the time. Example: before the Sony Betamax case, there were the statutory provisions of fair use, but it was unclear how it applied to home taping.
4. 4.▲
   by rubinass 17y ago

   >>>Fair use would protect your ability to use the software, and to make backup archival copies of the physical CD for use in case the original breaks. Is that true? It was my impression that (at least in the US) those are not e
5. 5.▲
   by rubinass 17y ago

   RE: why software and mp3s are under license (in addition to copyright protection). All creative works fixed in a tangible medium of expression get copyright protection. But without a license, they are useless. We are able to use software