From: Adrian Tymes (wingcat@pacbell.net)
Date: Wed Aug 21 2002 - 21:40:36 MDT
Michael Wiik wrote:
> Adrian Tymes wrote:
>>The problem is, the sheer number of individuals doing it. We're talking
>>thousands of people, easily. If there was one central organizer who
>>paid the individuals to do this (say, the review aggregation site's
>>owner), then that organizer could certainly be sued. This kind of thing
>>is very unlikely to happen without such an organizer. If it did, of
>>course, there'd be no one to sue, but the law leaves that loophole
>>because it knows it's practically impossible to exploit.
>
> What if it becomes simple instead of practically impossible? Consider
> the original scenario as only an easy to parse introduction to the
> concept. Now, do away with the initial email requesting the review.
> There is no such email. There is no organizer.
>
> There is never any money; what you get out of writing a review is an
> on-line copy of the book. Or maybe access to a site which contains
> thousands of such mini-reviews of lots of books. Even if you paid for
> the book, there might be advantages to having an online copy. All a site
> would have to do is accept one review from you and you might have access
> to their content.
<nods> But you fail to address my point: the core difficulty lies in
recruiting the sheer number of people to do it. (If one person started
doing a bunch of chapters in such a scheme, said person could of course
be arrested.) Just having an online copy of the book seems a small
reward...but, again, if enough people decide they want to do it that you
genuinely *could* get that many people to do it, the law would admit
that. If a large number of people want something badly enough to take
action, the law usually tends to permit them to do so - so long as, for
instance, they're not breaching other peoples' civil rights. (Ownership
of intellectual property not being a civil right, but at best a
commercial one.)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:16:20 MST