[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: definition of "use"

On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 09:23 -0300, Humberto Massa wrote:
> >This license hangs on the idea that the definition of the word 'use' in
> >the context of copyright law is as follows:
> >
> >       6: (law) the exercise of the legal right to enjoy the benefits
> >          of owning property; "we were given the use of his boat"
> >          [syn: {enjoyment}]
> >       (From WordNet 2.0)
> >(dict.org, dict use, also google'ing will reveal it in other areasof the
> >net)
> This definition does not match the definition of "usar" (=to use) in 
> Brazilian Law, which is based on possession, not ownership.

Ignoring the context of the source is no way to make an appropriate
translation. If the above is the definition of 'use' in the context of
copyright law, then "usar" is an inappropriate translation as it fails
to carry the same effect/meaning.

To give a more extreme example of the above, if "instrument" were to be
translated into a word that means "a device used to make audible music",
then the entire license would become ridiculous.

> >So, what is the definition of the word 'use'? Does it *only* mean to
> >execute a program? Or to *only* read a book? Or to *only* listen to that
> >music?
> >
> In Brazilian "computer programs" law, what we *do* have is that using a 
> program is defined by its "use license contract" terms, meaning the 
> execution of the program under those terms -- limited by our "fair use 
> clauses" (art. 6º Computer Programs Law [L.9609/98]: one backup copy; 
> citation with source in context of education; similarity by 
> functionality; integration on/to other systems) and by our (very heavy) 
> consumer-protection law.
> In the case of non-computer-programs-stuff, what we do have is a statute 
> limitation clause (art. 46 Author's Rights Act [L.9610/98]: lots of 
> stuff, among them musical execution in your home or in schools).

Yes, Title 17 has similar limitations on the exclusive rights.

> So, yes, one can suppose safely that the word "use" in the case of a 
> computer program license means executing such program; in the case of a 
> music, means listening to it in a private/familiar environment or in a 
> school; and in the case of a computer library, the execution of its API 
> by other programs.

I think one could safely say that of "usar" in the context of Brazilian
law, but, apparently, not of "use" in the context of U.S. copyright law
and Title 17.

Regards, James William Pye

Reply to: