Newsgroups: rec.arts.int-fiction
Path: news.duke.edu!newsgate.duke.edu!nntp-out.monmouth.com!newspeer.monmouth.com!dispose.news.demon.net!demon!btnet-peer0!btnet-peer!btnet!peer.news.eu-x.com!server2.netnews.ja.net!bath.ac.uk!unknown
From: "Ben A L Jemmett" <bal.jemmett@ukonline.co.uk>
Subject: Re: Click to Agree? (was Re: the ultimate IF archive)
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-Mimeole: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Sender: unknown@bj1084.resnet.bris.ac.uk (Address not verified)
Organization: Jemmett Glover Software Development
Lines: 44
Message-ID: <GqtpAB.AK6@bath.ac.uk>
X-Msmail-Priority: Normal
References: <3c5140ae.1475140@news.hotkey.net.au> <e9ceddbb.0201310317.3bb71f5c@posting.google.com> <u5iitc22shabcd@corp.supernews.com> <Gqt6C6.1MH@bath.ac.uk> <6xh68.12506$Wf1.4006571@ruti.visi.com> <GqtKzn.16F@bath.ac.uk> <3c59b4e4_1@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com>
X-Priority: 3
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2002 22:03:47 GMT
Xref: news.duke.edu rec.arts.int-fiction:98433

"Sam Dennis" <sam@malfunction.screaming.net> wrote in message
news:3c59b4e4_1@mk-nntp-1.news.uk.worldonline.com...
> Ben A L Jemmett wrote:
> > *shrug*  I would've thought the author would have granted the right to
> > distribute copies to the IF Archive by uploading it, not grant you the
right
> > to make copies through downloading it.  That would seem to be the
sensible
> > way to do it; the right to redistribute is given to those who do the
> > distribution, but not to the end-user.
>
> The first sentence is nonsense.  The author is the one who uploads to the
> archive and, being the copyright owner, obviously can do so or indeed
whatever
> the hell she likes with her work.

OK, scratch everything else, let's try:
* The author has copyright on the work.
* The author is the only person who can grant others permission to make
copies, as a consequence of the above.
* By uploading the game to the archive, the author can be assumed to be
granting the right to *someone* to make copies of the game; otherwise, why
would he bother?
* The easiest entity to grant that right to would be the archive itself --
so you can download a copy, which is OK, because the author has said that
the archive can make a copy for you to download.
* However, because the author has not granted the end-user the right to make
copies, the end-user cannot make more copies of the game to distribute to
others.

That seems sensible enough to me.

> I'm (relatively) sure that you're not a troll.

Thanks :)  I'm simply arguing the case based on what my lawyers told me last
time I discussed copyright and licensing with them, and what seems
acceptable to me as a programmer.

--
Regards,
Ben A L Jemmett.
(http://web.ukonline.co.uk/ben.jemmett/, http://www.deltasoft.com/)


