4 ms·
Nope, copyright also covers public performance of the copyrighted work. And that's exactly the part of IaaS or SaaS services that's so controversial lately.
by zozbot123 8y ago
Nope, copyright also covers public performance of the copyrighted work. And that's exactly the part of IaaS or SaaS services that's so controversial lately.
- hlandau 8y agoI'm unaware of any case law establishing that using software to provide a service constitutes "public performance" as defined in copyright law. Got a citation?
- zozbot123 8y ago> using software to provide a service This is not what I said, so could you please not put words in my mouth? It's about statutory provision, not just case law. And it's not about "using" a copyrighted work to provide a service, but when the core of what's being "provided" consists in the copyrighted work being 'acted' or 'played', to paying customers (the statute itself exempts performance that does not occur for pay, nor for commercial purposes), in a way that these customers can readily perceive (but that need not in any way result in a 'copy' of the work being conveyed - copy and public performance are distinct rights under the law!)
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- Arnt 8y agoI misunderstood you in the same way as hlandau. Perhaps you could explain what you meant in different words? A concrete example might help.
- kemitchell 8y agoI've heard that the drafters of AGPL wanted to "synthesize" a nonexistent public performance right. But I'm not aware of any US case law interpreting 17 USC 106(4) that way.