I am falling asleep, but I found a relevant explanation on the Copyright Office website. It's pretty basic to creative works, though--ownership of the object is different from ownership of the right to reproduce the object. It applies to paintings and sculptures and other forms of art as well as to photographs. And to books--selling used books is legal, photocopying them is not.
I don't have an opinion on this proposal (this is the first I've seen of it), but I do think copyright law and fair use guidelines badly need revising, especially since neither has really moved in step with the internet. Fair use has become increasingly difficult for museums and schools, because organizations use the threat of suing--even when they'd lose--to prevent fair use, and I think that's a HUGE problem. Copyright law is supposed to balance the good of society and the profits of the copyright holder, and it's swung really far towards the latter.
I haven't the foggiest how to address this all legally, not being a lawyer. :/
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2008-04-14 07:21 am (UTC)I don't have an opinion on this proposal (this is the first I've seen of it), but I do think copyright law and fair use guidelines badly need revising, especially since neither has really moved in step with the internet. Fair use has become increasingly difficult for museums and schools, because organizations use the threat of suing--even when they'd lose--to prevent fair use, and I think that's a HUGE problem. Copyright law is supposed to balance the good of society and the profits of the copyright holder, and it's swung really far towards the latter.
I haven't the foggiest how to address this all legally, not being a lawyer. :/