Haha: What you state is logical and reasonable. That position would be easy to defend, if the legal system around copyright made sense.
Unfortunately, it isn’t a logical system. You’re trying to apply copyright law—which has now been ruled on in court, officially making training AI with copyrighted material Fair Use.
The problem is that the issue with ebooks is all about contract law. Not copyright.
When you “purchase” an ebook (which is a misnomer), you’re actually signing a legally binding contract. A license, in effect, to use that copyrighted work for the sole purpose outlined in the contract. That outlined purpose expressly forbids using the work for anything other than you—the purchaser—reading it (usually on the platform they specify).
Having said that, many, many court rulings have found numerous license clauses like that to be unenforceable. That is, just because it’s written in the contract, doesn’t mean it’s legal.
The courts have ruled—thanks to everyone’s efforts fighting the MPAA, RIAA, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo in the 1990s and early 2000s—that everyone does have the legal right to “platform shift” whatever copyrighted works they own.
To get around that, those very same entities tried to use the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s rules about circumventing “copyright protection mechanisms” to try to make it illegal for people to platform shift their stuff anyway. That is, they added trivial encryption to all their platforms.
But it’s even more complicated than that! Because Congress gave the Librarian of Congress the power to say when it’s legal to circumvent such “copyright protections.” For example, technologies that aid the blind (I.e. gotta decrypt that file for the program to read it out loud).
There’s other exceptions and everyone fights to get more added whenever it comes up.
The key takeaway, though is that none of this complicated mess applies to physical books! So there ya go 😁👍
Haha: What you state is logical and reasonable. That position would be easy to defend, if the legal system around copyright made sense.
Unfortunately, it isn’t a logical system. You’re trying to apply copyright law—which has now been ruled on in court, officially making training AI with copyrighted material Fair Use.
The problem is that the issue with ebooks is all about contract law. Not copyright.
When you “purchase” an ebook (which is a misnomer), you’re actually signing a legally binding contract. A license, in effect, to use that copyrighted work for the sole purpose outlined in the contract. That outlined purpose expressly forbids using the work for anything other than you—the purchaser—reading it (usually on the platform they specify).
Having said that, many, many court rulings have found numerous license clauses like that to be unenforceable. That is, just because it’s written in the contract, doesn’t mean it’s legal.
The courts have ruled—thanks to everyone’s efforts fighting the MPAA, RIAA, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo in the 1990s and early 2000s—that everyone does have the legal right to “platform shift” whatever copyrighted works they own.
To get around that, those very same entities tried to use the Digital Millennium Copyright Act’s rules about circumventing “copyright protection mechanisms” to try to make it illegal for people to platform shift their stuff anyway. That is, they added trivial encryption to all their platforms.
But it’s even more complicated than that! Because Congress gave the Librarian of Congress the power to say when it’s legal to circumvent such “copyright protections.” For example, technologies that aid the blind (I.e. gotta decrypt that file for the program to read it out loud).
There’s other exceptions and everyone fights to get more added whenever it comes up.
The key takeaway, though is that none of this complicated mess applies to physical books! So there ya go 😁👍