Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="S'mon" data-source="post: 1470196" data-attributes="member: 463">I think the MP3.com case didn't fall under 'fair use' because the MP3.com company was making money off (unlicensed) exploitation of copyright works, so it interfered with commercial exploitation of the works (ie the c-owners couldn't make money off such a service if it was done for free), ergo fair-use exemptions didn't apply to MP3.com  - that's different from saying that the consumers who used MP3.com to make copies of works they possessed were breaking the law.I agree that downloading a copy of a work you already own seems to be 'legal limbo' in the USA in the absence of a statute specifically addressing this (I'm a UK law lecturer so I may have missed something).  In Canada it appears to be definitely legal.  In the UK it's in limbo too, but suing you would be pointless as damages would almost certainly be £0, unless the EU Copyright Enforcement Directive changes that.As to whether it's immoral - IMO clearly not.  But Your Morality May Vary.  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>