6 ms·
Err, no. That statutory exemption was created to resolve one court case and one worry: 1. A holding that you can commit infringement simply by loading a progr
by DannyBee 2y ago
Err, no.
That statutory exemption was created to resolve one court case and one worry:
1. A holding that you can commit infringement simply by loading a program into memory even for maintenance purposes. This was MAI v. Peak, one of the earliest real court cases on software copyright infringement. It was unfortunately followed by lots of courts.
2. A worry that creating tape backups/etc of computers, and copies of software cd's (since they don't last forever) was copyright infringement independent of anything else.
See the report for more details: https://www.copyright.gov/reports/studies/dmca/sec-104-report-vol-1.pdf https://www.copyright.gov/reports/studies/dmca/sec-104-repor...
Neither would eliminate infringement in this case.
- duskwuff 2y agoWRT #2, note that the relevant section of 17 USC §117 was written in 1980 - at the time, most software was distributed on media like floppy discs or tape which could easily be accidentally overwritten or damaged by faulty equipment. Creating personal backups of purchased software was already standard practice for many users; I think it's this sort of usage that the law was primarily meant to protect. Later applications like allowing users to backup computer hard drives with copyrighted software installed on them were a happy accident.
- DannyBee 2y agoOh, yes, you are right. I misread the dates. I knew it was not because of a case, that the worry was around archival copies of software, and that (to this day) nobody had actually ever been sued over making a backup (as far as anyone knows). I should have dug a little deeper back into the history.
- EMIRELADERO 2y agoIt would in the sense that mere use wouldn't count as infringement. Distribution is a different thing here and I agree there are more complex shenanigans there.