HP Books in text files - useful for fans

[Penny & Bryce Linsenmayer]

No: HPFGUIDX 9516

Hi --

Mauricio Drelichman wrote:

> I think that having an electronic version on your hard drive, *if you
> actually own the books and have them with you*, is not a copyright
> violation.

Actually it is very much a violation. I think this matter deserves some
attention just to be sure that everyone understands the issues & the
law.  Heidi (who is an intellectual property lawyer) may chime in with
corrections.  I'm an attorney but not an IP lawyer.  JK Rowling holds the
copyrights to the HP books.  A copyright is a "bundle of rights."  Hence,
she possesses (and can sell, assign or license) the following rights: the
right to reproduce the work in copies, the right to distribute the copies
to the public, the right to public performance & display of a work and
the right to prepare derivative works.  Typically, an author sells &
licenses the rights of reproducing & distribution to a publisher.

One of my writer's handbooks to copyright law has this to say: "Public
display of a work includes exhibiting or otherwise communicating a copy
of it 'by means of any device or process,' whether members of the public
receive it at the same place or in separate places, at the same time or
at different times.  If this sounds suspiciously like putting the work
out on a computer bulletin board, you've hit on one of the rights the
copyright law will protect."

> It's the same as making a photocopy of the book to scribble your notes
> on it, as I do with my textbooks, which I like to keep unmarked.

It's doubtful that anyone would challenge you for doing the above, but it
also is technically a violation of copyright laws.  Fair use "applies to
limited use of a small portion of a copyrighted work for approved
purposes, such as commentary, criticism or scholarship."  Fair use is a
technical & narow doctrine -- copying an entire book is clearly outside
the bounds of "fair use," even for scholarship.

> Who actually produces the electronic version is irrelevant. Think of it
> this way: would it be  a copyright infringemet to scan your own copy of
> HP and store it in your hard drive, using it every now and then to
> quickly find this or that passage?

Technically, yes.  You don't have the right to reproduce the book under
the copyright laws.

> What is illegal in this case is to freely distribute the electronic
> version without checking that whoever downloads it owns the
> copyright. Of course, downloading it without owning the copyright
> is also illegal.
>
As I said above, JK Rowling is the one & only copyright owner.  Just
because I purchased a copy of HP & the CoS does not make me a copyright
owner.  Only the author holds the copyright.  Her assignees (publishers,
WB, etc.) have acquired certain limited rights to help promote, sell &
distribute her work, but she retains the sole ownership of the
copyright.  A consumer who buys a book does not become a copyright owner.

> Waht we are seeing is yet another convolution in the tense interaction
> of technology and copyright law, where many issues are still undefined.
> Whoever posted that electronic version
> incurred in blatant copyright violation; but I don't think that whoever
> downloaded, if he/she owns the books, incurred in nearly as serious a
> crime, if any.

As I understand it now (having just checked some references out of
curiosity), electronic rights (the right to reproduce the work in
text-readable format, whether distributed through the internet or on
CD-ROMs) are now considered primary rights as much as print reproduction
rights (rather than just subsidiary rights).  None of my sources really
address this pirating/black market copies issue to any real extent, but
it is my mind very much a violation of copyright.  It may be less likely
that the author or publisher will institute proceedings against someone
who merely downloaded an illicit copy (rather than the person who scanned
& uploaded the pirated materials), but it is an equal violation under the
terms of the law I believe.

Fanfic: I assume most fanfic authors rely on the fact that they derive no
commercial benefit from the work, but I wonder if Heidi has any further
thoughts about whether fanfic authors are on firm ground with that
thought.  I asked the question long ago, but I think it was before Heidi
joined us.

Heidi can step in & correct anything I've misstated ....

Penny


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]