"Copying"...what does that mean?

[Major Variola (ret)]

At 05:10 PM 11/21/05 -0500, Tyler Durden wrote:
>
>Yes, I basically agree. But on the other hand, a bootleg in the old
days
>meant braking laws regarding illicit recording of an event. (As I
remember)
>you also broke a law regarding the copyright of the performance.
Cassette
>copies of vinyl were a tiny bit tricky, and the "gap" allowed for
copying
>for home use and maybe for a few friends.

Lossy (cassette) copies were illegal if you sold or disseminated to
too-broad a category of "associates".  Perfect (digital) copies are
not illegal if the associates are limited; the past several jobs
I've had, I've shared my ripped collection of physical-CDs
without worry, inside the local net.


>Basically, this was what I was wondering. When we move from the analog
>domain to the digital, how does one identify the data? It's no longer a

>series of 1s and 0s, because I can change the 1s in 0s in a
non-correctable
>way (which is what happens with lossy compression) and still go to jail
for
>transmitting that bitstream.

You want something operational, so: a very low-res copy is the
same.  This works for MP3s vs. CDs, etc.  In practice, a judge
will say that perceptually similar (semantic) copies are copies.
This is also true for eg trademarks.

>Unlike some Cypherpunks, I'm more litely anti-statist: One can only
claim
>legitimacy for a state if the laws are well defined enough so as to
allow
>for nonarbitrary enforcement (and I only said "claim", so I don't need
>killin...yet).

A state which protects individuals against harm from others is
pretty much defensible.  Those that need killing (impeachment,
fragging, etc) are those who abuse this "right" of violence.

There are some who don't hold that the State has any justification
for that role, but that is amoral.  In the vacuum, thugs rule.
(Cf any state which has no effective power.)

>Of course, there are probably legal arguments made somewhere that refer
to
>the perceived identity of a track or sample, so I guess what I'm really

>asking is if anyone knows what they are and if they make any sense
(aside
>from giving big corporates the ability to whack any college student
they
>want to make an example of).

The RIAA/MPAA would use low-res similarity matching, or
just hire offshore listeners/watchers.  Ones who grok sarcasm.
Fair use exemptions are an excuse under US laws.  YMMV.
Of course, if I have 10 friends, and they each have 10 friends,
content is toast, best charge for live performances.

I watched an industrial-sports event on TV, and it had
warnings that any description thereof without the consent
of the commisar of that "sport" was illegal.  FThatS.