http://www.lawfont.com/2006/10/16/no-virginia-there-is-no-exception-for-ipod-use-or-the-little-ipod-inquiry-that-couldnt/ an analysis of law, technology, economics, and policy Thu, 29 Dec 2011 19:59:43 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 http://www.lawfont.com/2006/10/16/no-virginia-there-is-no-exception-for-ipod-use-or-the-little-ipod-inquiry-that-couldnt/comment-page-1/#comment-9844 LawFont » Copyright all over the common law world… Thu, 14 Dec 2006 23:22:06 +0000 http://www.lawfont.com/?p=403#comment-9844 [...] Australia doesn’t limit the number of copies to just one per kind of device. This was because the original condition (one per format) was considered not to allow what it meant to - ie, iPod use (see my original comments here). Despite these problems, the Gowers Inquiry seems also to have suggested a similar limitation. Looks to me like the NZ proposal has similar problems. Everyone knows that iPods crash, or people update to smaller, cooler iPods. If you can only make one copy per kind of device, then don’t you have a problem once your iPod crashes and you have to re-fill it? [...] [...] Australia doesn’t limit the number of copies to just one per kind of device. This was because the original condition (one per format) was considered not to allow what it meant to – ie, iPod use (see my original comments here). Despite these problems, the Gowers Inquiry seems also to have suggested a similar limitation. Looks to me like the NZ proposal has similar problems. Everyone knows that iPods crash, or people update to smaller, cooler iPods. If you can only make one copy per kind of device, then don’t you have a problem once your iPod crashes and you have to re-fill it? [...]

]]>