From: Adam Skutt (askuttwnec.edu)
Date: Thu Oct 23 2003 - 10:44:28 CDT

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

Peter Hessler wrote:

> I don't see how that is breaking copyright laws. That patch allows the user
> to make "fair use" copies. If the user breaks the law by illegally copying
> that file, that is not our concern.
>

Its not necessarily fair use. The PDF may be given to the user under a
different set of rules, preventing fair use, and it may not be fair use
under a commerical setting. Not everyone in every case is prevented
from altering the document, or even using material from it. There was a
reason why our contract documentation was in text form only at my last
job: to prevent illegal usage of it. Our customer was extremely
sensitive about IP, and that was the safest way to prevent problems.

Now, it is true that in some cases, that it could be fair use, which is
why I suggest a compromise: prompt the user to say: "The document
properties normally disallow this action; are you sure you want to do
this?". That way, no matter what the case, the action is clearly the
users' problem.

While the patch is legal, even the US, its not inconcivable that if
someone got sued because of the patch, they could claim they didn't know
of its existance, and come after you (or OpenBSD as a whole). While I
doubt they'd win, its not a risk I'd want to take.

-- Adam

• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]