lauren@Rand-Unix.ARPA (04/10/84)
The Supreme Court recently determined that home taping of broadcast video was legal under the "fair use" doctrine, since it is typically used simply as a time shift device for the viewer's convenience. In other words, the viewer could have watched a program directly if they had been around, and it is OK for them to tape such a program so that they can watch it later. Such taping does not give them access to anything they would not otherwise have had. On the other hand, renting a videotape from some store and making a copy for yourself does not fall under fair use and is a closer analogy to the software piracy problem. --Lauren--
johnnyr@ihuxa.UUCP (John R. Rosenberg) (04/17/84)
There are two things that really differentiate software piracy
from home videotaping.
The first is the fact that any TV station broadcasts their signal
to me free of charge. They are hoping, of course, that I will
view the commercials as well as the show, and therefore buy the
product made by the company that bought the commercial time and
`brought me` the program. Videotaping that show and viewing it
later, whether the next day or sometime next year, is no different
than watching it the first time around. Some would say that I could
fastforward over the commercials (I do) but I could always leave
the room during the original broadcast. Remember, NBC and friends
give me thier signal free. What I do with it is my business, as long
as I don`t try for a profit.
Second, it is not easy to make a copy of a rented movie. In
order to do it I need access to 2 video recorders. It`s much
more common to have 2 disc drives than 2 VCRs. Even if you have only
1 drive you can copy segments of the disc into memory, then slip
in the `copy` disc and write it out, etc... Can`t do that with a VCR.
And since a rented movie is only $3-$4 why bother buying a tape
costing $8 or so?
John R Rosenberg
ihnp4!ihuxa!johnnyr