5 ms·

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117 "(a)Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.—Not

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117 https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/117 "(a)Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy.—Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided: (1) that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or (2) that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful." Where does it say that the copy must come from your original? If two people own the program, one may make a copy of his/her original for the other because the others original may have been destroyed. Remember, this law was written in the days of cds, records, etc. It is clear that you can lend an original copy but not an archival copy. If you lend the original copy, you physically cannot be using it(needless to say, you cannot legally use your archival copy while you are lending you original copy).

wazanator 9y ago
>one may make a copy of his/her original for the other because the others original may have been destroyed But then how would you prove you owned the original in the first place? I could claim to have at one point owned every Sega Genesis game but unfortunately set the box down while moving and ran it over with a truck while backing out the driveway. I of course did not keep this box of now shattered carts and I also bought it with cash from a man on Craigslist so there really isn't a paper trail. Is there a court case within the last 10 years we can reference that dealt with this kind of situation of once owning the original but it ended up destroyed?
- micahbright 9y ago
  > But then how would you prove you owned the original in the first place? Are we arguing about how it ought to work now? I'm just telling you how it does work. Burden of proof is on the plaintiff, so no one has to prove that they owned a copy of anything unless for some reason the burden of proof changes at trial. You could make the claim in your example and get away with it. That's why few of these cases are substantiated.

wazanator 9y ago

>one may make a copy of his/her original for the other because the others original may have been destroyed But then how would you prove you owned the original in the first place? I could claim to have at one point owned every Sega Genesis game but unfortunately set the box down while moving and ran it over with a truck while backing out the driveway. I of course did not keep this box of now shattered carts and I also bought it with cash from a man on Craigslist so there really isn't a paper trail. Is there a court case within the last 10 years we can reference that dealt with this kind of situation of once owning the original but it ended up destroyed?

micahbright 9y ago
> But then how would you prove you owned the original in the first place? Are we arguing about how it ought to work now? I'm just telling you how it does work. Burden of proof is on the plaintiff, so no one has to prove that they owned a copy of anything unless for some reason the burden of proof changes at trial. You could make the claim in your example and get away with it. That's why few of these cases are substantiated.