<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Jonathon Blake wrote:
<blockquote cite="midc4797ebf050515092723c2d601@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Jack wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Fortunately, I don't see circumvention in this case.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
a) Zondervan, amongst other publishers does consider BIble Import
Tool to be a tool designed to circumvent their IP rights.
</pre>
</blockquote>
The circumvention refered to by Jonathon and myself was the
circumvention of an access control only and not IP rights in general.
In fact, it may be illegal to circumvent an access control even when no
IP is protected by it, as in the case of PD texts. In many cases access
control protects labor (sweat of the brow) where there has been no
traditional view of anything "intelectual" (IP). Also, it is probably
irrelevent to the law how publishers see the Tool in relation to their
rights. The question is what does the law say about it and what is the
right thing before God to do. (Consider the last part a rhetorical
question not an invetaion to debate.)<br>
<blockquote cite="midc4797ebf050515092723c2d601@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">
b) Since the e-Sword modules are password protected, it is trivial to
demonstrate that converting them to other formats is an attempt to
circumvent legitimate IP Rights.
</pre>
</blockquote>
Again, you are using circumvent in an a broader way than just access
control. Also, whether or not the password is an access control or not
may not be as clear as it seems. There is a distinction in the law
between access control and copy protection. Circumventing a copy
protection is not a violation of the law against circumventing an
access control. In this spicific case I don't know. I just caution
people to be careful..<br>
<br>
Jerry<br>
</body>
</html>