If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot. More details on our policies, especially our Own the Source rule are available here. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.

We take our anti-piracy policy seriously
(08-02-2016, 11:46 AM)ThrowgnCpr Wrote: There isn't anything really up for debate here. U.S. copyright law is pretty clear, and what he is doing is problematic on multiple levels.

Let's assume that he is actually selling a retail copy of the disc with his hard drive. U.S. copyright law states that the individual in ownership of the physical media can make a backup copy for personal use. However, this backup cannot be transferred to a different party. As soon as the backup is transferred to another individual, the original owner is in violation of copyright law. By transferring the disc to a hard drive and then selling it, he has broken the law. The only way he could do this legally is if he sold the empty hardware along with the physical media, and provided instructions for how to make digital backups of media. He is in violation of copyright law prior to the fanedit even entering the picture. Of course if he has arranged to sell legal digital copies, that is a separate matter, but then there would be no need to sell a Blu-ray disc. Every bit of information on his website indicates that he has made a digital rip of the Blu-ray.

Further, by including a fanedit in a sales bundle, there is no clear distinction on the pricing breakdown. With this sale, a fanedit has become part of a monetary transaction. Again, the only way he would be able to do this legally is if he sold the retail version alone and contacted the buyer after the sale with instructions on how to obtain the fanedit (a separate "transaction"). The fanedit cannot be included in a package for sale, even if he claims that that component is free.

I know that, and I'm not debating it. I was just pointing out that it appears that the inclusion of a physical copy was intended to fulfill the own the source rule, and he probably assumed that this would be enough to satisfy Fanedit.org. That doesn't make what he did right or legal. It just means that he thought he was being clever enough to protect himself from negative consequences of what he was doing.

Messages In This Thread
RE: We take our anti-piracy policy seriously - by hbenthow - 08-02-2016, 12:34 PM

Forum Jump:

Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)