|
|
Posted by Karyudo on 04/11/06 05:26
On Mon, 10 Apr 2006 22:16:57 -0400, Jeff Rife <wevsr@nabs.net> wrote:
>~P~ (bmxtrix2005@cox.net) wrote in alt.tv.tech.hdtv:
>> Copyright is NOT a two way street.
>
>Read the law, dumbass. There are rights granted to copyright holders,
>rights specifically denied to copyright holders, rights granted to users
>of copyrighted works, and rights denied to users of copyrighted works.
>
>> If you think that the content creators, of any copywritten material,
> ^^^^^^^^^^^
>This word doesn't exist.
>
>> Licensing, by copyright holders is very strict and can be setup by those
>> holders in almost any way they wish so that their content is protected.
>
>No, actually, it can't. There are very specific rights granted to users
>of copyrighted material, and *nothing* that copyright holders do can take
>those away. They might make them harder to exercise, but users still
>have those rights.
Thank you, Jeff. Exactly what I'd have written. Content provider
propaganda seems to be working, if even consumers are under the
impression they have no rights!
BTW, I guess "copywritten" could be a word -- but it doesn't mean
"copyrighted" like the poster thinks it does.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|