It says the owner of copyright, something the owner of a CDs copy isn't if I'm not mistaken.Keeper of Hellfire wrote:I told it before, and I do it again: You are wrong!! The CD becomes your property.§ 106. Exclusive rights in copyrighted works
Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:
...
(3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the copyrighted work to the public by sale or other transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or lending;
what do i get when i purchase a cd ?
- Pie Row Maniac
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 9:38 pm
- Status: is not Quo!
- Location: Portland, OR
- Contact:
- Keeper of Hellfire
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:13 am
- Location: Germany
You don't read it right. It says the holder of of the copyright has the right to distribute copies of his work. If it's done by sale, the one who bought it gets ownership of the copy - in our case the CD. None of the rights of the copyright holder is transfered that way, nor has the buyer got any license. The only thing the owner of the copy is allowed to do is private use in the sense of the copyright law.Pie Row Maniac wrote:It says the owner of copyright, something the owner of a CDs copy isn't if I'm not mistaken.
- Keeper of Hellfire
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2005 6:13 am
- Location: Germany
- Pie Row Maniac
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2002 9:38 pm
- Status: is not Quo!
- Location: Portland, OR
- Contact:
What didn't I read right? I see what you were saying (in fact I thought you were trying to prove the opposite you proved to me in that postKeeper of Hellfire wrote:You don't read it right. It says the holder of of the copyright has the right to distribute copies of his work. If it's done by sale, the one who bought it gets ownership of the copy - in our case the CD. None of the rights of the copyright holder is transfered that way, nor has the buyer got any license. The only thing the owner of the copy is allowed to do is private use in the sense of the copyright law.Pie Row Maniac wrote:It says the owner of copyright, something the owner of a CDs copy isn't if I'm not mistaken.

- Scintilla
- (for EXTREME)
- Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 8:47 pm
- Status: Quo
- Location: New Jersey
- Contact:
You thought Keeper was calling the buyer of a CD the "owner of copyright" rather than the record company selling the CD.Pie Row Maniac wrote:What didn't I read right? I see what you were saying (in fact I thought you were trying to prove the opposite you proved to me in that postKeeper of Hellfire wrote:You don't read it right. It says the holder of of the copyright has the right to distribute copies of his work. If it's done by sale, the one who bought it gets ownership of the copy - in our case the CD. None of the rights of the copyright holder is transfered that way, nor has the buyer got any license. The only thing the owner of the copy is allowed to do is private use in the sense of the copyright law.Pie Row Maniac wrote:It says the owner of copyright, something the owner of a CDs copy isn't if I'm not mistaken.) but what did I miss?
- Coderjo
- Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2001 11:46 am
Re: hum
You cannot distribute the contents of the CD, nor can you distribute derivative works based on the contents of the CD.didrox wrote:so we dont own the copyrighted stuff , but we can use it modify , and make copys for personal use. so really we can do anything but distribute the contents of the CD , right ?
- Zaphod_Beeblebrox
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 4:45 am
- Location: Somewhere... but not here.
Re: hum
That kind of makes it sound like people who base their own music on other people's are infringing copyrightCoderjoe wrote:You cannot distribute the contents of the CD, nor can you distribute derivative works based on the contents of the CD.didrox wrote:so we dont own the copyrighted stuff , but we can use it modify , and make copys for personal use. so really we can do anything but distribute the contents of the CD , right ?

I thought it was that once something was altered past a certain point it becomes an 'original' work in the eyes of the law? Therefore meaning that you own the copyright?
Admittedly that does mean that if you want to make an AMV you have to basically remix the song so much that it's unrecogniseable and alter the animation so much that you can't see what's going on...or do original animation based on the anime, but still, it's an idea
