<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Nov 29, 2009 at 6:21 AM, Fedor Khod'kov <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:fedor76@istra.ru">fedor76@istra.ru</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Hello!<br>
<br>
Pirate Parties demand freedom to use and distribute all kind of works<br>
non-commercially, reserving copyright to commercial use. There are many<br>
different forms of commercial use. One form is commercial distribution,<br>
when fee is being charged for copies. Aesthetic works can be<br>
demonstrated or performed commercially.<br>
<br>
Functional works, such as computer software, textbooks and dictionaries,<br>
can be modified for fee in the way desired by a customer. Software can<br>
be supported commercially.<br></blockquote><div><br>"Noncommercial" is a huge can of worms wherever it appears. There's an entire spectrum between the clearcut case of 'selling a copy' and ... I think there is possibly not even a clearcut case of 'non-commercial?<br>
<br>Where does this become non-commercial?<br>- Selling a copy.<br>- Giving away a copy free, but only with purchase of something else<br>- Giving away copies without obligation, but where the goal is to attract people who may purchase other things<br>
- Giving away copies but putting paid-for advertising alongside it.<br>- Facilitating the free exchange of copies (without directly doing any of the copying) and displaying advertising along the way.<br>- Giving away copies and gaining goodwill (an accountable businesses asset) simply by virtue of being the giver.<br>
<br>I don't think there is such a problem with "Functional works' though. Copyright applies only to the person doing the copying. If I have been given a copy of a dictionary then it becomes my dictionary to use as I like, as long as I am not making further copies of it.<br>
<br>Compare with GPL software. Once I have legally obtained a copy of the software, that becomes 'my copy'. The GPL does not remotely restrict anything that I do with the software, until the point that I want to make a copy for someone else which is where 'copyright' is triggered again. <br>
<br>It would also help if we could kill the silly idea amongst non-free software companies that installation from the CD and transient copies in memory all count as potential copyright infringement, which I believe is what leads to the idea that the end user must be granted a licence to even make use of the software they purchased.<br>
<br><br></div></div>