Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="thpr" data-source="post: 3402125" data-attributes="member: 48911">I'm not a lawyer, but let me point out a few issues here.That depends on how the license was written.&nbsp; Unless there were special terms, CMP would own the translation of the copyrighted work to the PCC/LST format.&nbsp; However, since that data is a derivative work of the original books owned by WotC, WotC ALSO maintains copyright control over those datasets, so they cannot be copied or distributed without permission from *both* parties.&nbsp;What you're referring to in legal terms is the doctrine of first sale, see 17 USC 109 for how this applies to copyright.The problem with your analogy is that distribution of a new COPY of the dataset that CMP created falls under 17 USC 106(1) and 17 USC 106(3), which reserves for the copyright holder the right to copy (and distribute a copy of) the work.&nbsp; Hence the name, well, *copy*right.This is a better analogy: If you buy a book, the publisher cannot maintain any control over what you do with that physical copy - you can read it, resell it, sit on it, compost it, burn it, whatever you like.&nbsp; However, if you COPY it, you are violating copyright law, because it is the act of copying that is reserved for the copyright holder.&nbsp; That may be fair use, if the copy is for personal use, but once you distribute it to others (also violating 17 USC 106(3)), it is unlikely you will be protected by the fair use clauses (17 USC 107)As described, your case would never make it to a jury: It's a matter of law which would be handled in summary judgement against CMP.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="thpr, post: 3402125, member: 48911"] I'm not a lawyer, but let me point out a few issues here. That depends on how the license was written. Unless there were special terms, CMP would own the translation of the copyrighted work to the PCC/LST format. However, since that data is a derivative work of the original books owned by WotC, WotC ALSO maintains copyright control over those datasets, so they cannot be copied or distributed without permission from *both* parties. What you're referring to in legal terms is the doctrine of first sale, see 17 USC 109 for how this applies to copyright. The problem with your analogy is that distribution of a new COPY of the dataset that CMP created falls under 17 USC 106(1) and 17 USC 106(3), which reserves for the copyright holder the right to copy (and distribute a copy of) the work. Hence the name, well, *copy*right. This is a better analogy: If you buy a book, the publisher cannot maintain any control over what you do with that physical copy - you can read it, resell it, sit on it, compost it, burn it, whatever you like. However, if you COPY it, you are violating copyright law, because it is the act of copying that is reserved for the copyright holder. That may be fair use, if the copy is for personal use, but once you distribute it to others (also violating 17 USC 106(3)), it is unlikely you will be protected by the fair use clauses (17 USC 107) As described, your case would never make it to a jury: It's a matter of law which would be handled in summary judgement against CMP. [/QUOTE]

Verification