Seems to me that for the longest time the recording and music industries
counted on us losing or wearing out our records and films as a source of
guaranteed future income, and now that we're in the digital age, the idea
that we might be able to make backups is anathema to them.
And yet, when we buy music and movies digitally, we're actually advised to
make backup copies. At least the iTunes Store does. Could this be a case of
the right hand not knowing what the left is doing? Do we maybe need a test
lawsuit to establish that we have a right to make backup copies, a concept
that no reasonable person would find a problem with, and that most
reasonable people would consider the entertainment industry greedy for
trying to squelch?
On Tue, Mar 18, 2008 at 12:18 PM, Camille Atkins <CUAVCU@aol.com> wrote:
> I understand what you are saying...the purpose of making an archival copy
> is
> to have a copy in case the original is destroyed. According to my
> interpretation of copyright law, we are only allowed to make those backup
> circulating
> copies for software, not for audiovisual, which would include DVDs and
> music
> CDs. Check and see if your video or music producer/supplier gives you the
> purchaser (school) archival rights.
>
> Camille Atkins
> Librarian
> Fredericksburg Academy
> Fredericksburg, VA
> catkins@fredericksburgacademy.org
>
[ For info on ISED-L see http://www.gds.org/ISED-L ]
Submissions to ISED-L are released under a creative commons, attribution, non-commercial, share-alike license.
RSS Feed, http://listserv.syr.edu/scripts/wa.exe?RSS&L=ISED-L
