Klarinet Archive - Posting 000202.txt from 2009/02

From: "Matthew Lloyd" <matthew@-----.uk>
Subj: RE: [kl] Fair Use
Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 17:59:39 -0500

Your conclusion is flawed. What the conclusion should be is that no lawyer
feels that he can make money with such a claim. That is a commercial
decision, not a legal one.

You may think all lawyers are bloodsuckers, and if you don't then plenty do,
but ultimately lawyers need to pay the mortgage. It's why we go to work.

Matthew

On Mon, 9 Feb 2009 14:13:40 -0500, Jonathan Cohler <cohler@-----.org> wrote:

> What is clear so far is that you have not shown a single case to
> support your claim that copying over a marked-up part that one owns
> is a copyright violation, or any case even vaguely similar to that.
>
> Given the fact that this type of activity happens every day in every
> musical institution and musical environment all over the world, it is
> clear that no lawyers feel they could win such a case. ...
>
> Conclusion: it is highly likely that this is NOT a copyright violation.
>

------------------------------------------------------------------
The 2009 Woodwind.Org Donation Drive is going on right now - see
https://secure.donax-us.com/donation/ for more information.
------------------------------------------------------------------