Le 7 Janvier 2006 01:39, Hans-Christoph Steiner a écrit :
I don't know Canadian law, but generally, with copyright, the terms of which you are allowed to copy are not determined by law, but rather the license.
The Canadian law is probably not that different. When licenses are like "this is mine" or "just be nice", important rules are missing and default rules applies.
If a license says you are not allowed to make copies for yourself, you are not allowed to (except for fair use exceptions).
Backup copies are usually allowed : http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/117.html
The fair use exceptions are about using, not copying. We can use copyrighted works for private studying, research, commentary, parody and news; I think that's true even if the works are copied from non-authorized sources because we are not responsible of who's distributing. There's no clear and definitive rules about fair use and how exceptional it can be, and it's the responsability of the copyright owner to check if its rights are infringed. If you copy only for the sake of copying (or collecting), without using or distributing, copyright owners rarely care (unless they ask the BSA to scare you...)
An example of this is software licenses that only allow one installed copy.
Installed, not only copied. Anyway how that could be checked? Copyright licenses doesn't yet include perfect verification systems (like DRM or "trusted computing"), and that would conflict with the fair use doctrine.
What really matters is building trust. -- Marc