Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 9464411" data-attributes="member: 42582">The law of copyright, in its application to software products, has regard to these functional aspects of computing. Likewise the licences that software vendors grant to their consumers.But what is described in the OP doesn't, to me, seem to fall within this sort of category of use.I'm aware of this. My own jurisdiction is Australia.But I believe the OP is in the US.And even in the the context of the Netherlands, I would want to hear an expert opinion on whether or not what the OP describes falls within permitted use before forming an opinion on its lawfulness.I haven't reviewed the US law for the details of this sort of thing, as I'm not familiar enough with the US statute. But here is the relevant Australian law (Copyright Act 1968 (Cth)):113E  Fair dealing for purpose of access by persons with a disability (1) A fair dealing with copyright material does not infringe copyright in the material if the dealing is for the purpose of one or more persons with a disability having access to copyright material (whether the dealing is by any of those persons or by another person). (2) The matters to which regard must be had, in determining whether the dealing is a fair dealing for the purposes of this section, include the following matters: (a) the purpose and character of the dealing; (b) the nature of the copyright material; (c) the effect of the dealing upon the potential market for, or value of, the material; (d) if only part of the material is dealt with—the amount and substantiality of the part dealt with, taken in relation to the whole material. I don't know the nature of the licence that was granted to you when you acquired those PDFs. And I'm not an expert in IP law by any means. So I'm not going to offer any conjecture as to whether or not what you did is lawful.Are you arguing that what the OP did is not a copyright violation? Or that it will not be pursued by the copyright holder? Or something else.I'm well aware that plenty of people engage in unlawful copying (unlawful in the sense of *violating a copyright holder's rights in their IP). The mere fact that something is done, even commonly done, doesn't in itself establish that it is lawful.My post, to which you responded, was this:Are you saying that I am wrong, or not?EDIT: Out of an irrational sense of completeness I decided to look at the US statute. The provision exceptig reproduction for use by blind people from the general law of copyright is <a href="https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/121" target="_blank">17 U.S. Code § 121 -  Limitations on exclusive rights: Reproduction for blind or other people with disabilities</a>The key provision is this:(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement of copyright for an authorized entity to reproduce or to distribute in the United States copies or phonorecords of a previously published literary work or of a previously published musical work that has been fixed in the form of text or notation if such copies or phonorecords are reproduced or distributed in accessible formats exclusively for use by eligible persons.The rest of the section is mostly about ensuring that this exception does not permit the copies to be used for any purpose beyond that for which the exception applies.</blockquote>

Verification