Senate bill bans P2P networks

TalkBack 13 of 66:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

The Distributive Characteristics Of Copyright Products

Have little or nothing to do with copyright law. Especially when they are mere 'distributions from a form of 'contract law created via the author /authors of copyright law.

This is the problem that is more apharent than what the statement from a legislature who creates law of wich is legitamate social practice - distribution is contract law,distribution is not copyright law. It comes with all the facets of person of wich are denied,and easily via the same technology that stands to benifit those persons,simply by dening them,and that benifit of technology.

Just a single example is the fact that 'copyfriendly,does not change focus on media types,copyright law,or distribution. If a copyrighted item is 'copyfriendly - it is noted that the 'person in the 'effect of distribution exists to the person of whoms 'copyright in and of the law itself,decides the facet of 'rational fair use within its performance. In a form of 'copyfriendly you 'can 'share copyrighted works via its stipulation.

Copyright law in and of itself,has nothing to do with the contractual basis of wich author,and distributer relate the 'usage of works via those of wich are to participate in the 'effects of that copyrighted work could be decided upon.

Chiding that devices that are cohersive in distribution of copyrighted works wich 'violate the copyright,are misguided,because the participants of most copyright compaints are those holding contract to the 'distribution(s),and nothing of copyright law itself is a characteristic of that relationship.

So again it is not necesary for copyright to be 'lawful in devices that exist in and of themselves to technology wich enhances the distribution qualification 'in feature of copyrighted works. It is necesary for copyrighted works to decide one and only one thing for its participation to the technology that abounds for those wich benifit from that technology,and therefor participate:

That one simple thing IS IT COPYFRIENDLY ?

The incredible ignorance of this fact is the chiding into the retrospect of royalty via the stipulation of copyright law concluding that copyright law is conductive of its relationship to the person of use ,in the effect of 'distribution that adjucently coincides to its being 'marketed and 'sold.

No. The person of use is simply patronage to that product,as it is exhibited for 'effect and has no control over the details of 'distribution contracts between that propriety and its again parellel 'copyright (in and of itself).

The author has no control over the facet of detail conducting 'true or false of 'asset based on that effect,of wich technology to 'its person,is explicit to enhancement of that asset.

Any of those 'distributive persons will not debate the character of asset in the person of patronage. Because as it stands the performance of a feature in copyright,is concluded to 'distribution via its person,wich dimineshes the existence of that person - delegating that relationship of ehancement of wich the copyright holder should have true 'good to respond.

A distributer vacating an author of royalty,receipt,performance,and patronage would certainly be comparitevly transposed as the same preposition as that person vacated via the 'effect when his asset in monetary terms is turned to unauthorized membership of contract,usury and clause.

The single question is if a copyrighted work is copyfriendly.That is the single question. The question isn't that of piracy,or detail of definitives of property described by DMCA,or Electronic Theft Act.

Because the person of the 'asset in the 'effect of copyrighted works exist.And so does the technology of wich enhances communication through devices that use them. Deminishing the mention of copying of copyrighted works,or even detailing the dimension of 'distributing them through them being 'copyfriendly is in true real retrospect of the authors,works,and goods in commerce that any should be respectful,and responsible to persons of choice and identity.

Taking the identity of these technologies to mean they belong to the distributers of 'non-copyfriendly products on the basis premise of piracy in 'lieu of monetary 'royalties afforded copyright law, is misguided,misleading,and out of focus.

As distributers enjoy that fact.

-just talking.

Posted by: ParadigmOdyssey   Posted on: 06/23/04 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Reducing Server Total Cost of Ownership with VMware Virtualization Software VMware VMware virtualization enables customers to reduce their server TCO and ... Download Now
• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• VMware Infrastructure: A Guide to Bottom-Line Benefits VMware Frustrated by the costs of maintain ever larger data centers?or building ... Download Now