Klarinet Archive - Posting 001334.txt from 1999/01

From: "Kevin Fay (LCA)" <kevinfay@-----.com>
Subj: RE: [kl] Horovitz
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1999 17:31:51 -0500

And to make the intellectual property mix even more fascinating, "Xerox" is
not a verb, but a trademark. If you use it as a verb in an advertisement,
you'll get a nastygram from Rochester. If you sell "Xeroxing" services,
you'll get sued.

kjf

-----Original Message-----
From: charette@-----.org]
Subject: Re: [kl] Horovitz

Fred wrote:
While
it is not nexessarily illegal to xerox a copy of the Clarinet part only
(for study purposes), it IS illegal to xerox the whole piece. And it is
illegal to perform from a xeroxed part if you don't own the original.

---
A misconception. It is illegal to copy the entire clarinet part for study.
Excerpts would fit the "fair use" clause, not the entire work. It is alos
illegal to perform from a copy even if you own the piece.

It's not "technically illegal" as some people seem to think - there's no
such
thing as "technically illegal", which would imply that it's legal in some
other context. Going 5 mph (or kph) over a speed limit is illegal; it's
a value judgement you make on whether or not you choose to break the law.

It _is_ common practice to break some of these laws, but laws they are
nonetheless.

Cheers,
Mark Charette@-----.org

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unsubscribe from Klarinet, e-mail: klarinet-unsubscribe@-----.org
Subscribe to the Digest: klarinet-digest-subscribe@-----.org
Additional commands: klarinet-help@-----.org
Other problems: klarinet-owner@-----.org