Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Does copyright law really prevent a user from PRINTING/CON..

Tags:
Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
July 29, 2005 10:38:12 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 29 Jul 2005 07:22:01 -0700, wilt wrote:
> BMW holds copyright. That means YOU MUST get BMW permission to use
> their illustration in your manual, if you intend to distribute it. You
> have the right to photocopy something for your OWN use, such as a copy
> in your shop and a copy for your home office. But to copy something
> for distribution to others is technically illegal and the copyright
> owner can come after you! It is not merely about 'morals', it is about
> your own risk to LEGAL EXPOSURE and lawsuit.

This is very interesting so it would be nice to get a real legal opinion as
I am NOT a lawyer and I do NOT know or understand copyright law as it
pertains to individual use and I am not a moral person by any means (I live
in a glass house and so do you and the manufacturers).

From a legal standpoint, does the BMW shop-manual & owners manual copyright
really say what you imply above?

a) For example, does the BMW copyright really prevent you from PRINTING
(for your own personal use) the beemer manual you purchased for $100 or the
bimmer owners manual you downloaded for free from them? (Note the password
protection can disable printing unless you manually remove that printing
restriction as described in this thread.)

b) Does the BMW copyright say you can't convert the manual to Microsoft
Word, Microsoft RTF, Adobe FrameMaker, JPEG, GIF, AutoDesk DXF, Adobe
PostScript, etc.? (Note the methods described allow you to do all of these
conversions, and more.)

c) Does the BMW copyright say you can't add or delete pages from the
documents you bought or downloaded from them? (The methods described allow
you to add and delete pages as desired.)

d) Does the BMW copyright say you can't cut and paste text from and to
those documents you bought or downloaded from them for use in an email or
other personal use? (The methods described enable copy and paste of lines
of text as needed.)

e) And, lastly, (and perhaps most important for this thread), does the BMW
copyright say you can not take a JPEG of a page of the beemer or bimmer
shop manual and then annotate that page with your problem for the purpose
of posting that newly annotated PDF to a bimmer or beemer forum for the
purpose of obtaining help in repairing your motorcycle or automobile?

In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five desires
(printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages, cutting and
pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright, then we
should not be running or suggesting this conversion of password-protected
PDF to password-free PDF files!

--
Name obfuscated as I may be breaking (c) law by not understanding it!
Anonymous
July 29, 2005 10:41:45 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Hans Barnhofter" <hansb@barnhofter.com> wrote in message
news:4rq04owz29ga$.13wrdt3izg38e.dlg@40tude.net...
| On 29 Jul 2005 07:22:01 -0700, wilt wrote:
| > BMW holds copyright. That means YOU MUST get BMW permission to use
| > their illustration in your manual, if you intend to distribute it. You
| > have the right to photocopy something for your OWN use, such as a copy
| > in your shop and a copy for your home office. But to copy something
| > for distribution to others is technically illegal and the copyright
| > owner can come after you! It is not merely about 'morals', it is about
| > your own risk to LEGAL EXPOSURE and lawsuit.
|
| This is very interesting so it would be nice to get a real legal opinion
as
| I am NOT a lawyer and I do NOT know or understand copyright law as it
| pertains to individual use and I am not a moral person by any means (I
live
| in a glass house and so do you and the manufacturers).
|
| From a legal standpoint, does the BMW shop-manual & owners manual
copyright
| really say what you imply above?
|
| a) For example, does the BMW copyright really prevent you from PRINTING
| (for your own personal use) the beemer manual you purchased for $100 or
the
| bimmer owners manual you downloaded for free from them? (Note the password
| protection can disable printing unless you manually remove that printing
| restriction as described in this thread.)
|
| b) Does the BMW copyright say you can't convert the manual to Microsoft
| Word, Microsoft RTF, Adobe FrameMaker, JPEG, GIF, AutoDesk DXF, Adobe
| PostScript, etc.? (Note the methods described allow you to do all of these
| conversions, and more.)
|
| c) Does the BMW copyright say you can't add or delete pages from the
| documents you bought or downloaded from them? (The methods described allow
| you to add and delete pages as desired.)
|
| d) Does the BMW copyright say you can't cut and paste text from and to
| those documents you bought or downloaded from them for use in an email or
| other personal use? (The methods described enable copy and paste of lines
| of text as needed.)
|
| e) And, lastly, (and perhaps most important for this thread), does the BMW
| copyright say you can not take a JPEG of a page of the beemer or bimmer
| shop manual and then annotate that page with your problem for the purpose
| of posting that newly annotated PDF to a bimmer or beemer forum for the
| purpose of obtaining help in repairing your motorcycle or automobile?
|
| In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five desires
| (printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages, cutting and
| pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
| purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright, then we
| should not be running or suggesting this conversion of password-protected
| PDF to password-free PDF files!

It's not a question of what BMW's copy right says as a copy right says only
that BMW owns all rights to the work product. The real question is what
does BMW say (terms usually contained in BMW's license to the work) you can
do with the work product.
Anonymous
July 29, 2005 10:45:32 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"wilt" <wiltw@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1122666697.508235.151560@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
| Go to http://www.whatiscopyright.org/ which is written and maintained
| by an attornety, and read. To encapsulate information from that
| site...
| Copyright covers written and electronic (as well as other forms) of You
| cannot translate material copyrighted by others without their
| permission. You can use material for 'fair use' (explicit definitions
| of that term) if you credit the copyright holder. You can use
| information for educational non-profit purposes, but NOT verbatim

Your assumptions on educational non-profit are *far* too broad. copy right
is about ownership which is the right to determine how the work product is
used.
Anonymous
July 29, 2005 11:22:46 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

you can do anything you want with the file such as your scenarios of b, c,
d, etc. All day long, all you want. But you CANNOT distribute (i.e. sell
or otherwise give out as a an item of value) the manual in any shape or
form, regardless if you added, deleted or played with the pictures. That is
so simple surely you do understand.

Seems to me you are desperately trying to make their stuff yours.... and
that's not legal. You might get away with it, though companies are more
protective of their copyright materials than you might think....

----------------------------------------------
"Some people are born mediocre, some people achieve mediocrity, and
some people have mediocrity thrust upon them." Joseph Heller


"Hans Barnhofter" <hansb@barnhofter.com> wrote in message
news:4rq04owz29ga$.13wrdt3izg38e.dlg@40tude.net...
> On 29 Jul 2005 07:22:01 -0700, wilt wrote:
> > BMW holds copyright. That means YOU MUST get BMW permission to use
> > their illustration in your manual, if you intend to distribute it. You
> > have the right to photocopy something for your OWN use, such as a copy
> > in your shop and a copy for your home office. But to copy something
> > for distribution to others is technically illegal and the copyright
> > owner can come after you! It is not merely about 'morals', it is about
> > your own risk to LEGAL EXPOSURE and lawsuit.
>
> This is very interesting so it would be nice to get a real legal opinion
as
> I am NOT a lawyer and I do NOT know or understand copyright law as it
> pertains to individual use and I am not a moral person by any means (I
live
> in a glass house and so do you and the manufacturers).
>
> From a legal standpoint, does the BMW shop-manual & owners manual
copyright
> really say what you imply above?
>
> a) For example, does the BMW copyright really prevent you from PRINTING
> (for your own personal use) the beemer manual you purchased for $100 or
the
> bimmer owners manual you downloaded for free from them? (Note the password
> protection can disable printing unless you manually remove that printing
> restriction as described in this thread.)
>
> b) Does the BMW copyright say you can't convert the manual to Microsoft
> Word, Microsoft RTF, Adobe FrameMaker, JPEG, GIF, AutoDesk DXF, Adobe
> PostScript, etc.? (Note the methods described allow you to do all of these
> conversions, and more.)
>
> c) Does the BMW copyright say you can't add or delete pages from the
> documents you bought or downloaded from them? (The methods described allow
> you to add and delete pages as desired.)
>
> d) Does the BMW copyright say you can't cut and paste text from and to
> those documents you bought or downloaded from them for use in an email or
> other personal use? (The methods described enable copy and paste of lines
> of text as needed.)
>
> e) And, lastly, (and perhaps most important for this thread), does the BMW
> copyright say you can not take a JPEG of a page of the beemer or bimmer
> shop manual and then annotate that page with your problem for the purpose
> of posting that newly annotated PDF to a bimmer or beemer forum for the
> purpose of obtaining help in repairing your motorcycle or automobile?
>
> In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five desires
> (printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages, cutting and
> pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
> purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright, then we
> should not be running or suggesting this conversion of password-protected
> PDF to password-free PDF files!
>
> --
> Name obfuscated as I may be breaking (c) law by not understanding it!
Anonymous
July 29, 2005 11:39:35 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Interested in the Answer" <enfant_de_nice@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1122665408.778088.35150@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> Hans Barnhofter wrote:
> > In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five desires
> > (printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages, cutting and
> > pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
> > purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright
>
> If they sold you the manual and if they password protected it so that
> you can't print it or delete pages from it or save it in another
> format, then you are breaking their copyright law by printing the
> manual, saving it in any other format than the original format, or by
> deleting pages or reordering pages from that said manual.
>
> You (and everyone else who is printing and deleting and reording and
> convering pages from these manuals) are breaking the law in the United
> States.

If the law in the United States prohibits such use, the law in the
United States (like virtually all laws passed by the corporate
whores in DC in the past ten years) is silly and deserves to be
ignored.
Anonymous
July 29, 2005 11:39:36 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John Adams"

| > Hans Barnhofter wrote:
| > > In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five
desires
| > > (printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages, cutting
and
| > > pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
| > > purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright
| >
| > If they sold you the manual and if they password protected it so that
| > you can't print it or delete pages from it or save it in another
| > format, then you are breaking their copyright law by printing the
| > manual, saving it in any other format than the original format, or by
| > deleting pages or reordering pages from that said manual.
| >
| > You (and everyone else who is printing and deleting and recording and
| > convering pages from these manuals) are breaking the law in the United
| > States.
|
| If the law in the United States prohibits such use, the law in the
| United States (like virtually all laws passed by the corporate
| whores in DC in the past ten years) is silly and deserves to be
| ignored.

In which case those that ignore the law can be sent to jail.
Anonymous
July 29, 2005 11:58:27 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 29 Jul 2005 12:51:37 -0700, wilt wrote:

> Go to http://www.whatiscopyright.org/ which is written and maintained
> by an attornety, and read. To encapsulate information from that
> site...
> Copyright covers written and electronic (as well as other forms) of You
> cannot translate material copyrighted by others without their
> permission. You can use material for 'fair use' (explicit definitions
> of that term) if you credit the copyright holder. You can use
> information for educational non-profit purposes, but NOT verbatim

But can you legally convert the copyrighted material from a newer version
of incompatible PDF to an older version of compatible PDF?
Anonymous
July 29, 2005 11:58:28 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Hans Barnhofter wrote:
> On 29 Jul 2005 12:51:37 -0700, wilt wrote:
>
>> Go to http://www.whatiscopyright.org/ which is written and
>> maintained
>> by an attornety, and read. To encapsulate information from that
>> site...
>> Copyright covers written and electronic (as well as other forms) of
>> You cannot translate material copyrighted by others without their
>> permission. You can use material for 'fair use' (explicit
>> definitions of that term) if you credit the copyright holder. You
>> can use information for educational non-profit purposes, but NOT
>> verbatim
>
> But can you legally convert the copyrighted material from a newer
> version of incompatible PDF to an older version of compatible PDF?

I don't have a "user agreement" with Mr Adobe, with regard to his PDF
file format.

My friend Mr PDFInterpreter displays and saves the content of a PDF
file of unknown origin. I look at it and benefit from its information.

What agreement or law have I violated?

I mess with the content of the file. I send it to Mr Third Party who
has no agreement with either Mr Adobe or MrPDFInterpreter and who
benefits similarly. What agreement or law have I violated? What
agreement or law has Mr Third Party violated?

How likely is it that Mr ForThePeople will prosecute any violations?
Mr Adobe?

--
Frank ess
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 12:04:50 AM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

John Adams wrote:
> "Interested in the Answer" <enfant_de_nice@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1122665408.778088.35150@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
>>Hans Barnhofter wrote:
>>
>>>In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five desires
>>>(printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages, cutting and
>>>pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
>>>purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright
>>
>>If they sold you the manual and if they password protected it so that
>>you can't print it or delete pages from it or save it in another
>>format, then you are breaking their copyright law by printing the
>>manual, saving it in any other format than the original format, or by
>>deleting pages or reordering pages from that said manual.
>>
>>You (and everyone else who is printing and deleting and reording and
>>convering pages from these manuals) are breaking the law in the United
>>States.
>
>
> If the law in the United States prohibits such use, the law in the
> United States (like virtually all laws passed by the corporate
> whores in DC in the past ten years) is silly and deserves to be
> ignored.

Hmmmm. I guess I can just happily ignore any law that I think
is silly.

I guess we all can.

Ken
July 30, 2005 1:30:40 AM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

It does not prevent anything but does threaten the wrongdoer with legal
action.

--
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com
home of The Camera-ist's Manifesto
The Improved Links Pages are at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/links/mlinks00.html
A sample chapter from "Haight-Ashbury" is at
http://www.chapelhillnoir.com/writ/hait/hatitl.html

"Hans Barnhofter" <hansb@barnhofter.com> wrote in message
news:4rq04owz29ga$.13wrdt3izg38e.dlg@40tude.net...
> On 29 Jul 2005 07:22:01 -0700, wilt wrote:
> > BMW holds copyright. That means YOU MUST get BMW permission to use
> > their illustration in your manual, if you intend to distribute it. You
> > have the right to photocopy something for your OWN use, such as a copy
> > in your shop and a copy for your home office. But to copy something
> > for distribution to others is technically illegal and the copyright
> > owner can come after you! It is not merely about 'morals', it is about
> > your own risk to LEGAL EXPOSURE and lawsuit.
>
> This is very interesting so it would be nice to get a real legal opinion
as
> I am NOT a lawyer and I do NOT know or understand copyright law as it
> pertains to individual use and I am not a moral person by any means (I
live
> in a glass house and so do you and the manufacturers).
>
> From a legal standpoint, does the BMW shop-manual & owners manual
copyright
> really say what you imply above?
>
> a) For example, does the BMW copyright really prevent you from PRINTING
> (for your own personal use) the beemer manual you purchased for $100 or
the
> bimmer owners manual you downloaded for free from them? (Note the password
> protection can disable printing unless you manually remove that printing
> restriction as described in this thread.)
>
> b) Does the BMW copyright say you can't convert the manual to Microsoft
> Word, Microsoft RTF, Adobe FrameMaker, JPEG, GIF, AutoDesk DXF, Adobe
> PostScript, etc.? (Note the methods described allow you to do all of these
> conversions, and more.)
>
> c) Does the BMW copyright say you can't add or delete pages from the
> documents you bought or downloaded from them? (The methods described allow
> you to add and delete pages as desired.)
>
> d) Does the BMW copyright say you can't cut and paste text from and to
> those documents you bought or downloaded from them for use in an email or
> other personal use? (The methods described enable copy and paste of lines
> of text as needed.)
>
> e) And, lastly, (and perhaps most important for this thread), does the BMW
> copyright say you can not take a JPEG of a page of the beemer or bimmer
> shop manual and then annotate that page with your problem for the purpose
> of posting that newly annotated PDF to a bimmer or beemer forum for the
> purpose of obtaining help in repairing your motorcycle or automobile?
>
> In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five desires
> (printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages, cutting and
> pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
> purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright, then we
> should not be running or suggesting this conversion of password-protected
> PDF to password-free PDF files!
>
> --
> Name obfuscated as I may be breaking (c) law by not understanding it!
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 3:09:17 AM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"NotMe" <me@privacy.net> wrote in message news:JCyGe.3334$c63.2701@fe05.lga...
> "John Adams"
>
> | > Hans Barnhofter wrote:
> | > > In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five
> desires
> | > > (printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages, cutting
> and
> | > > pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
> | > > purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright
> | >
> | > If they sold you the manual and if they password protected it so that
> | > you can't print it or delete pages from it or save it in another
> | > format, then you are breaking their copyright law by printing the
> | > manual, saving it in any other format than the original format, or by
> | > deleting pages or reordering pages from that said manual.
> | >
> | > You (and everyone else who is printing and deleting and recording and
> | > convering pages from these manuals) are breaking the law in the United
> | > States.
> |
> | If the law in the United States prohibits such use, the law in the
> | United States (like virtually all laws passed by the corporate
> | whores in DC in the past ten years) is silly and deserves to be
> | ignored.
>
> In which case those that ignore the law can be sent to jail.

"Can" is the operative word here.

"Treason doth never prosper. What is the reason?
For if treason prosper, none dare call it treason."
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 4:53:44 AM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"John Adams"

| > | > Hans Barnhofter wrote:
| > | > > In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five
| > desires (printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages,
cutting
| > and pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
| > | > > purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright
| > | >
| > | > If they sold you the manual and if they password protected it so
that
| > | > you can't print it or delete pages from it or save it in another
| > | > format, then you are breaking their copyright law by printing the
| > | > manual, saving it in any other format than the original format, or
by
| > | > deleting pages or reordering pages from that said manual.
| > | >
| > | > You (and everyone else who is printing and deleting and recording
and
| > | > convering pages from these manuals) are breaking the law in the
United
| > | > States.
| > |
| > | If the law in the United States prohibits such use, the law in the
| > | United States (like virtually all laws passed by the corporate
| > | whores in DC in the past ten years) is silly and deserves to be
| > | ignored.
| >
| > In which case those that ignore the law can be sent to jail.
|
| "Can" is the operative word here.

In that those who own the copy right can take action independent of the
police there is a considerable hammer. OTOH a criminal case under copy
right/trade mark violation is almost a slam dunk ... what prosecutor worth
his salt won't take to shooting fish in a barrel especially as I'm an
upstanding citizen and tax payer and the other party is clearly a low down
thief.

I should note that in most instances under the OP post the injured party is
not the software manufacture but the person who created the work itself. So
if they don;t take offense/action for copy right violation I doubt the
software manufacture take action in the circumstance outlined.

FWIW I create copyrighted material *all* the time using the latest and
greatest software (I have the canceled checks to prove it <g>) but I
likewise deal with clients that use older or alternate software systems. As
the originator and holder of the copy right I can (and do) do with my work
product what I chose.

OTOH if you don't have my express written permission to modify my work
product best not mess with me and mine. (this is an example I'm not that
much of a designated A**H*** but I do hire professional S.*.Bs to protect my
interest when the need presents itself). BTW evidence of criminal activity
uncovered during civil discovery is admissible in a criminal case.

Don't believe it? Check on the number of arrest for the sale of counter fit
merchandise in various parts of the USA. Does it happen in all cases? No.
Does it happen in most cases? Again no ... but how many are willing to take
that chance?
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 5:03:11 AM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"wilt"
| <<Your assumptions on educational non-profit are *far* too broad. >>
| I assumed NOTHING...I was merely taking information from the web site
| which was responsible for the information that I summarized. The point
| was that copyrighted information which is copied in order to education
| others can be used without violation of the copyright owner, but not
| verbatim!

Again you take a bit of selectivley accurate information and project to a
presumption that is false. As others have posted the concept of Fair Use is
very limited and is based on case law.

From a previous post on the subject in another tread.

http://www.copyright.com/ccc/do/viewPage?pageCode=cr10-...

Copyright and Academia
The Copyright Act generally applies to the creation, protection and use of
literary, cinematic, pictorial and many other forms of creative materials.
In addition, there are some specific provisions in the Copyright Act for the
use of copyright-protected materials by academic institutions, including:

Section 107 on fair use, which applies to activities such as using excerpts
for illustration or comment, unexpected and spontaneous reproduction of
classroom materials, and creation of parodies.
Section 108 on reproduction by libraries and archives, which applies to such
activities as archiving; replacing lost, damaged or obsolete copies; patron
requests for entire works; and interlibrary loans.
Section 109 on first sale, which permits the resale or lending of copies of
works, providing the basis for library lending and the sale of used books.
Section 110 on performance and display in the classroom, which permits
certain types of content use in the classroom and in distance education.

Fair Use
The concept of fair use can be confusing and difficult to apply to
particular uses of copyright protected material. Understanding the concept
of fair use and when it applies may help ensure your compliance with
copyright law.

Fair use is a uniquely U.S. concept, created by judges and enshrined in the
law. Fair use recognizes that certain types of use of other people's
copyright protected works do not require the copyright holder's
authorization. In these instances, it is presumed the use is minimal enough
that it does not interfere with the copyright holder's exclusive rights to
reproduce and otherwise reuse the work.

Fair use is primarily designed to allow the use of the copyright protected
work for commentary, parody, news reporting, research and education.
However, fair use is not an exception to copyright compliance so much as it
is a "legal defense." That is, if you use a copyright protected work and the
copyright owner claims copyright infringement, you may be able to assert a
defense of fair use, which you would then have to prove.

Section 107 of the United States Copyright Act lists four factors to help
judges determine, and therefore to help you predict, when content usage may
be considered "fair use."

The purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a
commercial nature or is for nonprofit, educational purposes.

*If a particular usage is intended to help you or your organization to
derive financial or other business-related benefits from the copyright
material, then that is probably not fair use.*

The nature of the copyrighted work.
Use of a purely factual work is more likely to be considered fair use than
use of someone's creative work.

The amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the
copyright protected work as a whole.
There are no set page counts or percentages that define the boundaries of
fair use. Courts exercise common-sense judgment about whether what is being
used is too much of, or so important to, the original overall work as to be
beyond the scope of fair use.

The effect of the use on the potential market for or value of the copyright
protected work.
This factor looks at whether the nature of the use competes with or
diminishes the potential market for the form of use that the copyright
holder is already employing, or can reasonably be expected soon to employ,
in order to make money for itself through licensing.

At one extreme, simple reproduction of a work (i.e., photocopying) is
commonly licensed by copyright holders, and therefore photocopying in a
business environment is not likely to be considered fair use.

At the other extreme, true parody is more likely to be considered fair use
because it is unlikely that the original copyright holder would create a
parody of his or her own work.

While the factors above are helpful guides, they do not clearly identify
uses that are or are not fair use. Fair use is not a straightforward
concept, therefore the fair use analysis must be conducted on a case-by-case
basis.

Understanding the scope of fair use and becoming familiar with those
situations where it applies and those where it does not can help protect you
and your organization from unauthorized use of copyright materials, however,
many individuals do not want this responsibility. Corporate Copyright
Policies (link to section) often provide guidelines for determining whether
a use may be considered fair use. Frequently, a complete risk analysis is
required. Most organizations prefer to follow the motto "when in doubt,
obtain permission."

Thousands of cases, and many, many books and articles have attempted to
analyze fair use in order to define specific examples.

Examples of Fair Use include:

Quotation of excerpts in a review or criticism for purposes of illustration
or comment.
Quotation of short passages in a scholarly or technical work for
illustration or clarification of the author's observations.
Reproduction of material for classroom use where the reproduction was
unexpected and spontaneous - for example, where an article in the morning's
paper is directly relevant to that day's class topic.
Use in a parody of short portions of the work itself.
A summary of an address or article, which may include quotations of short
passages of the copyrighted work.
The First Sale Doctrine
The physical ownership of an item, such as a book or a CD, is not the same
as owning the copyright to the work embodied in that item.

Under the first sale doctrine (section 109 of the Copyright Act), ownership
of a physical copy of a copyright-protected work permits lending, reselling,
disposing, etc. of the item, but it does not permit reproducing the
material, publicly displaying or performing it, or otherwise engaging in any
of the acts reserved for the copyright holder, because the transfer of the
physical copy does not include transfer of the copyright rights to the work.

Infringing Copyright

In utilizing any of the exclusive rights provided to the copyright holder
without his permission, you may be violating or infringing on his rights
under the Copyright Act. If the copyright holder has registered the
infringed work with the U.S. Copyright Office prior to the infringement, the
copyright holder may be entitled to compensation for his loss. Compensation
may include damages, such as lost profits from the infringing activity, or
statutory damages ranging from $250 to $150,000 for each infringing copy or
higher if the court feels that the infringement was committed "willfully."

You may also be criminally liable if you willfully copy a work for profit or
financial gain, or if the work has a value of more than $1,000. Penalties
can include a one year jail sentence plus fines. If the value is more than
$2,500, you may be sentenced to five years in jail plus fines. Criminal
penalties generally apply to large-scale commercial piracy.
Anonymous
July 30, 2005 7:57:18 AM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 19:39:35 GMT, "John Adams" <nospam@rmii.net>
wrote:

>"Interested in the Answer" <enfant_de_nice@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:1122665408.778088.35150@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>> Hans Barnhofter wrote:
>> > In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five desires
>> > (printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages, cutting and
>> > pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
>> > purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright
>>
>> If they sold you the manual and if they password protected it so that
>> you can't print it or delete pages from it or save it in another
>> format, then you are breaking their copyright law by printing the
>> manual, saving it in any other format than the original format, or by
>> deleting pages or reordering pages from that said manual.
>>
>> You (and everyone else who is printing and deleting and reording and
>> convering pages from these manuals) are breaking the law in the United
>> States.
>
>If the law in the United States prohibits such use, the law in the
>United States (like virtually all laws passed by the corporate
>whores in DC in the past ten years) is silly and deserves to be
>ignored.
>
Sure, but there may be a risk attached. Globalization
basically means a race to the bottom for all but corporate rights.

You can be sure the British Stalinization of their country
through the obsessive, ubiquitous installation of video surveillance
(6,000 [known] cameras in London's downtown area alone, fer
chrissakes) will be held up here in due time as a necessary "tool" for
the DHS types. In turn, the Europeans will be happy to accept our
version of copyright, currently extending until everyone now alive has
expired, will be the norm globe-wide.

And if you don't like the situation, be advised that they can
get your job done somewhere in Asia by preteens for $0.17 a day.

And just when the hell did the cents sign disappear from
keyboards.
Anonymous
July 31, 2005 12:09:02 AM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"wilt"

| Not being an attorney, I was not providing any legal advice nor making
| any pretense of providing the exact letter of the law. I was merely a
| layman's interpretation for another layman, especially in recognition
| of the fact that case law does have exceptions for whatever
| circumstance.
|
| I hope you are not representing the above as exact unless you are truly
| an attorney.

Curious just what are you referring to as 'the above'?
Anonymous
August 1, 2005 1:38:54 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <CZvGe.65303$5V4.17776@pd7tw3no>,
Ken Weitzel <kweitzel@shaw.ca> wrote:
>
>Hmmmm. I guess I can just happily ignore any law that I think
>is silly.

It is your duty to do so. Owing to the off-topic nature of this
subject, I'll be brief:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_disobedience

>I guess we all can.

Most certainly so.

Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 5:48:48 AM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On Fri, 29 Jul 2005 18:38:12 GMT, Hans Barnhofter
<hansb@barnhofter.com> wrote:

>On 29 Jul 2005 07:22:01 -0700, wilt wrote:
>> BMW holds copyright. That means YOU MUST get BMW permission to use
>> their illustration in your manual, if you intend to distribute it. You
>> have the right to photocopy something for your OWN use, such as a copy
>> in your shop and a copy for your home office. But to copy something
>> for distribution to others is technically illegal and the copyright
>> owner can come after you! It is not merely about 'morals', it is about
>> your own risk to LEGAL EXPOSURE and lawsuit.
>
>This is very interesting so it would be nice to get a real legal opinion as
>I am NOT a lawyer and I do NOT know or understand copyright law as it
>pertains to individual use and I am not a moral person by any means (I live
>in a glass house and so do you and the manufacturers).
>
>From a legal standpoint, does the BMW shop-manual & owners manual copyright
>really say what you imply above?
>
>a) For example, does the BMW copyright really prevent you from PRINTING
>(for your own personal use) the beemer manual you purchased for $100 or the
>bimmer owners manual you downloaded for free from them? (Note the password
>protection can disable printing unless you manually remove that printing
>restriction as described in this thread.)
>
>b) Does the BMW copyright say you can't convert the manual to Microsoft
>Word, Microsoft RTF, Adobe FrameMaker, JPEG, GIF, AutoDesk DXF, Adobe
>PostScript, etc.? (Note the methods described allow you to do all of these
>conversions, and more.)
>
>c) Does the BMW copyright say you can't add or delete pages from the
>documents you bought or downloaded from them? (The methods described allow
>you to add and delete pages as desired.)
>
>d) Does the BMW copyright say you can't cut and paste text from and to
>those documents you bought or downloaded from them for use in an email or
>other personal use? (The methods described enable copy and paste of lines
>of text as needed.)
>
>e) And, lastly, (and perhaps most important for this thread), does the BMW
>copyright say you can not take a JPEG of a page of the beemer or bimmer
>shop manual and then annotate that page with your problem for the purpose
>of posting that newly annotated PDF to a bimmer or beemer forum for the
>purpose of obtaining help in repairing your motorcycle or automobile?
>
>In summary, my question to the legal folks is, if all these five desires
>(printing pages, converting pages, adding or deleting pages, cutting and
>pasting text from pages, and annotating pages with photos for repair
>purposes) are actually expressly forbidden in the BMW copyright, then we
>should not be running or suggesting this conversion of password-protected
>PDF to password-free PDF files!

I liked the neighbors child so I wanted a copy of the child. I went
over to the neighbors house while the husband was at work and screwed
his wife. In 9 months I hope to have a copy of their child.
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 1:17:06 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Keep in mind that copyright law never prevents you from doing something-
it only makes you financially liable if you do the wrong thing. It is
all about money. Have you financially harmed the copyright owner? It
is up to courts (and juries) to decide.
Anonymous
August 2, 2005 3:46:22 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I would say that if you want to write your own manual you should take
your own pictures.

If you compare a picture from the BMW manual to one of similar content
that you took and one that a third photographer took, could you tell the
differences? Do you think that BMW officials or a judge will see the
differences? What is the likelihood that BMW officials will know that
you have your own manual? The answers are why you can or cannot use
BMW's pictures and whether you can or cannot to convicted of copywrite
violation.
Anonymous
August 11, 2005 4:00:42 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

> On 29 Jul 2005 07:22:01 -0700, wilt wrote:
> > BMW holds copyright. That means YOU MUST get BMW permission to use
> > their illustration in your manual, if you intend to distribute it. You
> > have the right to photocopy something for your OWN use, such as a copy
> > in your shop and a copy for your home office. But to copy something
> > for distribution to others is technically illegal and the copyright
> > owner can come after you! It is not merely about 'morals', it is about
> > your own risk to LEGAL EXPOSURE and lawsuit.

As far as the UK law is concerned the above is not correct.
You have no right "to photocopy something for your OWN use, such as a copy
in your shop and a copy for your home office"
You have the right to a copy (ONE copy) for private study purpose only, and
even then there could be complications....
Anonymous
August 11, 2005 10:58:40 PM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <42fb2fdf_1@nnrp1.news.uk.psi.net>,
e_svoboda <e_svoboda@isc.queens.ac.uk> wrote:
>> On 29 Jul 2005 07:22:01 -0700, wilt wrote:
>> > BMW holds copyright. That means YOU MUST get BMW permission to use
>> > their illustration in your manual, if you intend to distribute it. You
>> > have the right to photocopy something for your OWN use, such as a copy
>> > in your shop and a copy for your home office. But to copy something
>> > for distribution to others is technically illegal and the copyright
>> > owner can come after you! It is not merely about 'morals', it is about
>> > your own risk to LEGAL EXPOSURE and lawsuit.
>
>As far as the UK law is concerned the above is not correct.
>You have no right "to photocopy something for your OWN use, such as a copy
> in your shop and a copy for your home office"
>You have the right to a copy (ONE copy) for private study purpose only, and
>even then there could be complications....

Norwegian copyright law doesn't concern itself a lot with copying at
all (ironically), in stead concentrating on distribution aspects.

Cheers
Bent D
--
Bent Dalager - bcd@pvv.org - http://www.pvv.org/~bcd
powered by emacs
Anonymous
August 22, 2005 2:08:08 AM

Archived from groups: misc.legal.computing,misc.legal,comp.text.pdf,rec.photo.digital (More info?)

"Don Stauffer" <stauffer@usfamily.net> wrote in message
news:FfLHe.17$N85.4367@news.uswest.net...
> Keep in mind that copyright law never prevents you from doing something-
> it only makes you financially liable if you do the wrong thing. It is
> all about money. Have you financially harmed the copyright owner? It
> is up to courts (and juries) to decide.

True, but not the whole truth. Statutes set down minimum amounts you can
recover without having to show financial loss. This protects both
individuals and big companies. The little guy is protected from the big guy
because the big guy will feel a pinch even if the big doesn't make a dime.
If there was no such provision, big companies could simply take whatever
they want from everybody and take their chances in court. Likewise, the big
guy is protected from the little guy saying, "well, they really didn't lose
any money."
!