tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4990922102626688253.post1172250137568795503..comments2023-04-15T11:42:35.385-04:00Comments on Go To Hellman: Heisenberg's Uncertain CopyrightErichttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14172740163003223132noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4990922102626688253.post-59912185854146066372013-01-19T12:59:44.847-05:002013-01-19T12:59:44.847-05:00Eric,
Actually this situation is a whole lot more...Eric,<br /><br />Actually this situation is a whole lot more ambiguous than you suggest.<br /><br />Your scenarios 3-8 are perhaps interesting theoretical constructs but they have little basis in reality. Copying doesn't really happen over a network. Bits are copied locally and then sent somewhere; and along the way many other copies are made. Thus the question is really which of those many copies qualify as "incidental," not requiring permission under law or license. The treatment of incidental copies probably varies more, and is more ambiguous, across national copyright laws than your scenarios 3-8.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4990922102626688253.post-18670287974983122572012-12-11T12:46:49.261-05:002012-12-11T12:46:49.261-05:00Yes, jurisdiction. That's part of what I meant...Yes, jurisdiction. That's part of what I meant by "where the judge is sitting". But the more I learn about it, the less I understand.Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04483241450401134977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4990922102626688253.post-72168636359506046422012-12-11T10:44:16.235-05:002012-12-11T10:44:16.235-05:00Thanks for the great post! There is another facto...Thanks for the great post! There is another factor in your Quantum Copyright hypothetical to consider before "jail time and statutory damages." And it has a direct effect on every scenario you name: jurisdiction. Jurisdiction (simply defined) is a court's power to hear and decide a matter. In your cases it may be a court's power to hear and determine matters between different countries or persons of different countries. This is decided first - even before any copyright claims are vetted before the court. Without jurisdiction, the court can't even hear the copyright case. Many a copyright lawsuit has been sunk by a motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction. Of equal importance to your "quantum copy" questions are questions of harm: where does the copyright harm to an individual/corporation occur? What degree of harm that occurs will suffice to exercise jurisdiction over a non-citizen of Australia or the U.S.? Often these murky questions stop an interesting, and perhaps groundbreaking case, from getting the full copyright analysis.<br />(Also – Australia has a long history of dealing with “copies” in unique ways. See Dow Jones v. Gutnick [2002] HCA 56, where the Australian court employs the “multiple publication rule” which states there is a separate publication in relation to each copy delivered to a reader. If a newspaper circulates 100,000 copies of the one edition [defamatory, libelous, illegal, etc. to plaintiff], she has available to her at least 100,000 causes of action.)<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4990922102626688253.post-25604040377410628532012-12-10T20:18:54.234-05:002012-12-10T20:18:54.234-05:00Piet (and Andromeda) when you copy in Australia, t...Piet (and Andromeda) when you copy in Australia, then import to the USA, section 602 (b) applies, and the "under this title" SCOTUS discussion during Kirtsaeng is on point, definitely. And maybe a court would say that copying with source in Australia and destination in US constitutes importation of a copy rather than transnational copying. My main point is we don't really know which is which for legal purposes. The legal code appears to me to presume that copying and importation are separate actions. But what do I know?Erichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04483241450401134977noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4990922102626688253.post-10273789252816120402012-12-10T19:08:03.137-05:002012-12-10T19:08:03.137-05:00Given how much arguing in Kirtsaeng's oral arg...Given how much arguing in Kirtsaeng's oral arguments concerned the import of "under this title", I think it's the same issue entirely...Andromedahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04570669960490418748noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4990922102626688253.post-91567774455741174512012-12-10T18:56:34.275-05:002012-12-10T18:56:34.275-05:00And what if you made a copy to your computer in Au...And what if you made a copy to your computer in Australia and then take your computer to the USA. You are not making a copy then, but you have a copy in the USA. Is that copy then affected by USA copyright law?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com