4 ms·

You leave out (B) and (C) of that paragraph: (B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of

by aaronsw 16y ago

You leave out (B) and (C) of that paragraph: (B) by the reproduction or distribution, including by electronic means, during any 180-day period, of 1 or more copies or phonorecords of 1 or more copyrighted works, which have a total retail value of more than $1,000; or (C) by the distribution of a work being prepared for commercial distribution, by making it available on a computer network accessible to members of the public, if such person knew or should have known that the work was intended for commercial distribution. Not the "or".

benologist 16y ago
How does it matter? The retail value of the UFC/NFL live broadcasts would be several orders of magnitude more than $1,000 to the networks/stations licensing them, and even if you let that slide based on what the end viewer is paying instead of the licensees the guy still hits C face-first. So he's matching either ABC, or AC, either of which put him in the running for a free vacation at club fed.
- tptacek 16y ago
  It matters to the extent that one might want to build a case against the law by suggesting it could ensnare innocuous (or even accidental) infringement; the argument being, "look how easy it is to run afoul of (B) or (C)". And that's an argument I have a lot of sympathy for, even if it isn't germane to this guy's situation.
  - hugh3 16y ago
    Well I dunno. Part C seems to only apply to works being "being prepared for production", which most folks wouldn't even have access to. Part B would be the easiest for your casual pirate to run afoul of, but if you're pirating $1000 worth of stuff within a year then... yeah, you're moving out of "occasional vice" territory and into the "just watching lots of stuff without paying for it" territory.
tptacek 16y ago
You're right. I misread it. And I note further that (B) and (C) were deliberately added to address people copying software electronically without profiting from it. But we're quibbling over how I (mis)represented the law. The fact remains: this guy got busted for taking $90,000+ out of his infringement scheme. He hit (A), not (B) or (C). That, I think, is a pretty salient detail for the FSF to have provided. Don't you agree with that?

by aaronsw 16y ago

benologist 16y ago

How does it matter? The retail value of the UFC/NFL live broadcasts would be several orders of magnitude more than $1,000 to the networks/stations licensing them, and even if you let that slide based on what the end viewer is paying instead of the licensees the guy still hits C face-first. So he's matching either ABC, or AC, either of which put him in the running for a free vacation at club fed.

tptacek 16y ago
It matters to the extent that one might want to build a case against the law by suggesting it could ensnare innocuous (or even accidental) infringement; the argument being, "look how easy it is to run afoul of (B) or (C)". And that's an argument I have a lot of sympathy for, even if it isn't germane to this guy's situation.
- hugh3 16y ago
  Well I dunno. Part C seems to only apply to works being "being prepared for production", which most folks wouldn't even have access to. Part B would be the easiest for your casual pirate to run afoul of, but if you're pirating $1000 worth of stuff within a year then... yeah, you're moving out of "occasional vice" territory and into the "just watching lots of stuff without paying for it" territory.

tptacek 16y ago

You're right. I misread it. And I note further that (B) and (C) were deliberately added to address people copying software electronically without profiting from it. But we're quibbling over how I (mis)represented the law. The fact remains: this guy got busted for taking $90,000+ out of his infringement scheme. He hit (A), not (B) or (C). That, I think, is a pretty salient detail for the FSF to have provided. Don't you agree with that?