Quote:
|
Originally Posted by DABhand
A country's own Law can not and never will overpower the owner/s instructions.
Lets not go back to your example way back, where in your language it said "contract" which you never did explain to me what your intepretation of the word contract was..
Again no countrys' law will overpower the right for people to protect their possessions and goods, software being amongst this fact.
If a country were to force this onto software publishers/developers, I can assure you they wouldnt want to release software into that country if they are basically allowing their software to be easily copied and distributed.
|
Actually, people only have any 'rights' if the government grants them. You have a right to a fair trial because the government says you do. Over in the US you have the right to shoot a burgler because the government says you do. In the UK you goto prison for shooting a burglar (protecting your property?)
Copyright only exists because the governent grants it. It is subject to the conditions the government imposes upon it. I cant see a software company ever leaving out the US's (or anyone elses) 300 million population because 'they might copy it' especially when the US people could buy it overseas and copy it. They gamble that enough people will buy it that it will make money.
Copyright is regulated by the government, and if they say you have the right to a backup copy, the publisher saying 'um yeah we have made up a super duper copyright where you cant back it up and can only run it if you stand on one leg and recite the alphabet backwards' has no legal basis.
However, its arguable that the DCMA prevents you making a backup, as it prohibits you from 'circumventing' a copy protection. Although its arguable that a 1:1 copy leaves the copy protection intact and hasnt circumvented it....
The publishers on the otherhand are under no obligation to ASSIST you in making your legal backup, and are even able to do their best to PREVENT you making such a backup.