Now we just need to proof they’ve copied the files onto a second hard drive, so they own two copies
If we’re gonna keep it as a copyright issue, I think people are mostly mad they’re not able to reprint the books themselves if they wanted to. We’re not speaking from a copyright position
If you own a book, you can legally make as many copies of it as you want. As long as you’re not distributing them, the courts treat that as a single effective copy.
Yes. That does make sense.
If you bought a book, scanned it—destroying it in the process—then read it on your computer, that would be completely acceptable.
Why is it wrong when a corporation does the same thing?
They’re not claiming ownership of the copyrights, just ownership of a copy. Which is how copyright works.
Now we just need to proof they’ve copied the files onto a second hard drive, so they own two copies
If we’re gonna keep it as a copyright issue, I think people are mostly mad they’re not able to reprint the books themselves if they wanted to. We’re not speaking from a copyright position
If you own a book, you can legally make as many copies of it as you want. As long as you’re not distributing them, the courts treat that as a single effective copy.