Timeline for Am I at risk by storing or using software that violates copyright?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 15, 2022 at 7:03 | comment | added | Brandin | Personally I still have lots of software that is simply sitting on media like CDs, etc. I don't think simply having ('storing') those media on my shelves is itself a copyright violation, even if it turns out that something on there was a copyright violation at some point. Maybe whoever originally put the copies of illegally copied material on those media violated copyright, for example. Of course, if I install a copy that is illegal on my computer, that's a different situation that was not made clear in this Answer. | |
| Jun 15, 2022 at 6:48 | comment | added | Dale M♦ | @Brandin are you suggesting the developer broke into the OPs house and copied it from their device/website to the OP’s computer | |
| Jun 15, 2022 at 6:39 | comment | added | Brandin | In the specific scenario presented in this question, it seems to me that that a software publishing company is the one that did the copying, not the OP himself. It's quite possible to get and store software (from someone else) without doing any act of copying yourself, nor causing an act of copying to be done, for example, if the software is stored on a medium of some sort, such as a CD, a USB key, etc. | |
| Jun 14, 2022 at 22:42 | comment | added | Dale M♦ | @Brandin copyright doesn’t care about storing or using, it cares about copying (the hint is in the name). If you can get a copy on your computer without copying it, that’s fine. But you can’t. | |
| Jun 14, 2022 at 14:09 | comment | added | Brandin | This does not answer the question as stated. OP asks about "using" and "storing". That is, a company gave him a copy of some software, that he thought was a legal copy, but it turns out to be an illegal copy for some reason (maybe it includes 'copyleft' open source software that requires releasing specific source code, which was not done, for example). The question is, what is the legal risk or problem of retaining that illegal copy on one's hard disk ('storing'), and what is the legal risk or problem of running that illegal copy that was already copied onto one's hard disk ('using'). | |
| Jun 10, 2022 at 18:19 | comment | added | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | @Kevin: Thanks for the citation. | |
| Jun 10, 2022 at 17:45 | comment | added | Kevin | @R..GitHub: Those copies are exempt under 17 USC 117(a)(1) under US law. I don't know whether other countries have analogous laws, but I imagine it is likely. | |
| Jun 10, 2022 at 16:55 | comment | added | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | ...and it is exceedingly unlikely that anyone, especially an open source software author, is going to find a lawyer and a court willing to entertain the idea that someone else's automated processes, making transient partial copies of a work the OP had good faith reason to believe they had acquired legally, is actionable copyright infringement by the OP. | |
| Jun 10, 2022 at 16:53 | comment | added | R.. GitHub STOP HELPING ICE | This answer is probably overly scary (which makes it a good lawyer answer, but not necessarily good practical advice). As a party who purchased and is using the software, it's very unlikely that you are making copies of it. On a purely mechanical level as part of use, some transient copies - likely in small parts at a time and rarely or never the whole thing - might be made, but if/when that happens, it's being done by a machine that was programmed to do so by someone else, not OP the operator, ... | |
| Jun 10, 2022 at 15:05 | comment | added | DRF | That distinction (civil vs. criminal) might be worth explaining in the answer, given the differing stakes and also likelihood of prosecution/suit. | |
| Jun 10, 2022 at 15:03 | comment | added | DRF | Ahh so civil copyright claims are statutory, though punishment seems to depend on willfulness, Criminal copyright infringement on the hand is not statutory and the government must prove mens rea. | |
| Jun 10, 2022 at 15:00 | comment | added | DRF | Is there any precedent on this? Is copyright infringement a statutory crime? Don't you have to have mens rea? | |
| Jun 10, 2022 at 14:46 | comment | added | Barmar | But it was the software company that made the copy and gave it to them (perhaps by sending them a disk), not the OP. This is more analogous to "possession of stolen goods", isn't it? You may have to destroy your copy, but you're not liable for primary infringement, are you? | |
| Jun 10, 2022 at 3:09 | history | answered | Dale M♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |