[pp.int.general] philosophy vs. action

[Reinier Bakels]

> > It is the same!
> Not the same, first of all in a conceptual context. You talk about 
> /limitations/ & /exceptions/ -fair use is such-, I talk about *rights*.

Sigh! The political purpose is that (among other things) private 
noncommercial copying should be allowed (without compensation by levies - 
which effectively implies it is still a reserved act under copyright ...)

The underlying philosophical argument is that it is (perhaps) a *right* of 
the public.

The *action* perspective is that the same result can perhaps be achieved 
much faster by arguing that this right actually complies with the "three 
step test" , which - our course (being a statutory regulation itself)- 
relates to present statutory copyright law, that refers to "limitations & 
exceptions".

reinier