[pp.int.general] Commercial use of functional works

[Fedor Khod'kov]

Boris Turovskiy <tourovski at gmail.com> writes:

> A software is "used" for "practical purposes", but likewise a picture
> used for illustrating an article or a song used partially for making a
> soundtrack can be said to be "used" for "practical purposes" rather
> than "distributed".

I don't think so.  Picture used for illustrating article is clearly
being distributed along with that article, but cookbook is not
distributed along with food which is cooked following its recipies.

> In that sense I oppose the division into "functional works" and
> "non-functional works", but consider author's rights protections for
> use in commercial activity to apply to both "use" and "distribution"
> (like many software licenses "for personal use only" do).

Actually, copyright is not a "protection" of any "rights", it is a
restriction.  And I believe that the restriction of use of copyrighted
works for practical purposes (commercial or not) is too much (I
explained why I think so in the very first message of this thread).

I'm not sure if the law should divide functional and non-functional
works, though.  When I say "functional works" I mean "works which is
intended for practical use", but maybe it's better to divide "practical
use" itself (which should be free) from distribution, demonstration and
other ways of use, which can be restricted by copyright.

Fedor.