Strange question

[Spinward Scout]

I've got the CT CD. I can print out anything on it for my own personal use, right? So, does this mean that I can take the CD to a printer and have The Traveller Book printed out in it's entirety - book cover and all? As long as it's for my own personal use?

 

[Andrew Boulton]

At home, for your own use, okay.

Shops may - should, really - refuse to print something you don't own the copyright on.

 

[HG_B]

I've got the CT CD. I can print out anything on it for my own personal use, right? So, does this mean that I can take the CD to a printer and have The Traveller Book printed out in it's entirety - book cover and all? As long as it's for my own personal use?

In the U.S., yes you can.

 

[Spinward Scout]

Sweet!

The reason I'm asking is because the cover is ripped off of my softcover The Traveller Book and it would be great to have a hardcover.

As long as the book never goes into circulation, I'm fine, I think.

 

[fredofmars]

At home, for your own use, okay.

Shops may - should, really - refuse to print something you don't own the copyright on.

Some of the older issues of the JTAS (the old print version) had notices in the front saying it was OK to get photocopies of out-of-print issues. I had to show that a couple of times when getting photocopies of specific articles. Additionally, the Library of Congress has most of the old print issues of JTAS, and will send you a photocopy of them (though it does cost some minimal amount) via the Inter Library Loan program.

 

[far-trader]

Some of the older issues of the JTAS (the old print version) had notices in the front saying it was OK to get photocopies of out-of-print issues. I had to show that a couple of times when getting photocopies of specific articles. Additionally, the Library of Congress has most of the old print issues of JTAS, and will send you a photocopy of them (though it does cost some minimal amount) via the Inter Library Loan program.

Technically only Library to Library though, and only as a loan to the person through that Library, to be returned and not to be copied by the borrower, as I understand it.

 

[robject]

Sweet!

The reason I'm asking is because the cover is ripped off of my softcover The Traveller Book and it would be great to have a hardcover.

As long as the book never goes into circulation, I'm fine, I think.

I've got a hardcover. Interested? No dustjacket tho.

 

[Spinward Scout]

I've got a hardcover. Interested? No dustjacket tho.

What price are you talking? If it's cheaper for me to just hit a print shop, I'll probably pass.

 

[Andrew Boulton]

I've checked with Marc, and yes, you can have them printed.

 

[HG_B]

I've checked with Marc, and yes, you can have them printed.

Fortunately OR unfortunately, Marc has no say in the matter. It is a matter of statute & Case law...

 

[Spinward Scout]

Fortunately OR unfortunately, Marc has no say in the matter. It is a matter of statute & Case law...

Since Marc is the copyright holder, he would be responsible for initiating any litigation and has just indicated that he wouldn't, so...

 

[HG_B]

Since Marc is the copyright holder, he would be responsible for initiating any litigation and has just indicated that he wouldn't, so...

So? He can litigate all he wants. It doesn't change statute. I guess he could pour $ down the drain. But, he obviously much smarter than that...

 

[whartung]

So? He can litigate all he wants. It doesn't change statute. I guess he could pour $ down the drain. But, he obviously much smarter than that...

The point being whether it being legal or illegal is irrelevant since the rights holder has affirmed that he's not going to challenge either way.

 

[HG_B]

The point being whether it being legal or illegal is irrelevant since the rights holder has affirmed that he's not going to challenge either way.

REALLY? I wouldn't EVER take this kind of 'evidence' into court. Relying on the blog post of a 3rd party claiming a rights holder said something isn't a good legal move...

But, fortunately the point is moot as the law already gives the right to copy for personal use.

 

[aramis]

REALLY? I wouldn't EVER take this kind of 'evidence' into court. Relying on the blog post of a 3rd party claiming a rights holder said something isn't a good legal move...

But, fortunately the point is moot as the law already gives the right to copy for personal use.

Prove it. Outside of Canada, at least. (In Canada, it's black-letter law that one can have an electronic document printed. In the US, it falls to fair use doctrine, and making a copy on paper of an electronic document isn't always fair use, and if the document uses electronic restrictions, it's actually potentially criminal. See the DMCA and later copyright amendments. It has changed rapidly in the last 20 years, including deletion of certain sections of federal law which included the educational exemption as black-letter law... It's being argued lately, but not tried in court, that format shifting should be fair use, but it's not proven yet. Likewise, there is the issue of first rights doctrine.)

 

[Patron Zero]

A lifetime back I worked for Kinko's and the issue of copyright was a daily occurrence, I will say I'm glad for the Fair Use legislation of the late 1980s.

Text of such was posted on each copy machine and the 'liability' shifted to the customers-users, that said I have had instances post-Kinko's of copy center operators being 'squeamish' about making large sized copies from CD-DVD sources. One in fact had me actually press the Start key to absolve him of any responsibility.



http://www.copyright.gov/fls/fl102.html