> you think you can archive it and copy and re-distribute it for eternity Did you read my post? I specifically said you couldn't. >> You do not have the right

> you think you can archive it and copy and re-distribute it for eternity Did you read my post? I specifically said you couldn't. >> You do not have the right to make new copies. Copy rights are separate from your property rights related to your copy of a work. > You are not a lawyer Yes, although I have been studying copyright issues since the early 1990s. I'm not saying anything remotely controversial in current interpretations of copyright law. Incidentally, a new interpretation that is slowly being accepted by courts is misuse of copyright[1]. Based on the older patent misuse, the idea is having a copyright only grants rights related to creating new copies of a work. Claiming that copyright somehow also grants you other totally unrelated right can result in the court preventing the copyright holder from enforcing their copyright[2]. Relying on misinformation about copyright can have serious consequences. > too bad you try to act like one You're seeing what you want to see. Providing references to what you're talking about is encouraged on HN. [1] Lasercomb America, Inc. v. Reynolds [2] https://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/litigationnews/practice_areas/072810-intellectual-property-copyright-misuse-overview.html https://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/litigationnews/pract...