I wanna learn to drive better, I think I'll go steal - er - acquire me a Beemer so I can learn. I'm never gonna sell it, so there's no financial gain involved...STRICTLY for my educational use ...
The broad application of the use "educational" is where I think the posting from Title 17 is flawed (not the law, the out of context posting of the law). I believe if you get around to the definition of "education" within Federal Law, it will not apply to any individual that wants to learn something.
Without looking (yet) I'm betting it refers to a bona fide institution or individual working under the authority of that institution, within that institution's guidelines (and the law). The phrasing of the Act, IMHO, is such that it prevents the holder of the copyright from sueing or charging for the mere utterance or reference to material contained in the copyrighted material especially in an educational environment.
When used, in part or in whole, the holder of the copyrighted material can / does demand that appropriate attribution be made a permanent part of the material (document, software, whatever). Failure to properly attribute (and get permission to use) information from a material that has been copyrighted WILL get you sued if it's a commercial product. When referenced in an educational paper, attribution must be given or the writer runs the risk of a charge of plagerism. As part of the traditional structure of the paper, a section is dedicated to attribution to the original author or publisher.
If that were not the case, then NO school would buy their software; why would they? Microsoft (for example) offers educational discounts on their products (and still has a EULA that clearly defines who is eligible... you must be part of an organized / institutional educational program). Yet, schools do spend major bucks to buy their software - WHY? - because if they didn't the software producers would sue their a$$ off and they know it.
And, since we're in Cut & Paste mode, something to read from
Stanford.edu
Article I Section 8 | Clause 8 - Patent and Copyright Clause of the Consitution.
[The Congress shall have power] "To promote the progress of science and useful arts, by securing for limited times to authors and inventors the exclusive right to their respective writings and discoveries;"
From Section 108:
(2)
No reproduction, distribution, display, or performance is authorized under this subsection if -
(A)
the work is subject to normal commercial exploitation;
(B)
a copy or phonorecord of the work can be obtained at a reasonable price; or
(C)
the copyright owner or its agent provides notice pursuant to regulations promulgated by the Register of Copyrights that either of the conditions set forth in subparagraphs (A) and (B) applies.
(3)
The exemption provided in this subsection does not apply to any subsequent uses by users other than such library or archives.
Sec. 117. - Limitations on exclusive rights: Computer programs
(a) Making of Additional Copy or Adaptation by Owner of Copy. -
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided:
(1)
that such a new copy or adaptation is created as an essential step in the utilization of the computer program in conjunction with a machine and that it is used in no other manner, or
(2)
that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful.
(b) Lease, Sale, or Other Transfer of Additional Copy or Adaptation. -
Any exact copies prepared in accordance with the provisions of this section may be leased, sold, or otherwise transferred, along with the copy from which such copies were prepared, only as part of the lease, sale, or other transfer of all rights in the program. Adaptations so prepared may be transferred only with the authorization of the copyright owner.
(c) Machine Maintenance or Repair. -
Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106, it is not an infringement for the owner or lessee of a machine to make or authorize the making of a copy of a computer program if such copy is made solely by virtue of the activation of a machine that lawfully contains an authorized copy of the computer program, for purposes only of maintenance or repair of that machine, if -
(1)
such new copy is used in no other manner and is destroyed immediately after the maintenance or repair is completed; and
(2)
with respect to any computer program or part thereof that is not necessary for that machine to be activated, such program or part thereof is not accessed or used other than to make such new copy by virtue of the activation of the machine.
(d) Definitions. -
For purposes of this section -
(1)
the ''maintenance'' of a machine is the servicing of the machine in order to make it work in accordance with its original specifications and any changes to those specifications authorized for that machine; and
(2)
the ''repair'' of a machine is the restoring of the machine to the state of working in accordance with its original specifications and any changes to those specifications authorized for that machine
And finally (this really isn't worth this much time ...) from
This link, same site ....
I. Fair Use for Teaching and Research
The "fair use" doctrine allows limited reproduction of copyrighted works for educational and research purposes. The relevant portion of the copyright statue provides that the "fair use" of a copyrighted work, including reproduction "for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research" is not an infringement of copyright. The law lists the following factors as the ones to be evaluated in determining whether a particular use of a copyrighted work is a permitted "fair use," rather than an infringement of the copyright:
? the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
? the nature of the copyrighted work;
? the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole, and
? the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
Although all of these factors will be considered, the last factor is the most important in determining whether a particular use is "fair." Where a work is available for purchase or license from the copyright owner in the medium or format desired, copying of all or a significant portion of the work in lieu of purchasing or licensing a sufficient number of "authorized" copies would be presumptively unfair. Where only a small portion of a work is to be copied and the work would not be used if purchase or licensing of a sufficient number of authorized copies were required, the intended use is more likely to be found to be fair.
(end of the quoted text)
Of course, it would be easily determined if the copyright owner and the law thinks you're stealing or whether you qualify for "fair use:" All we gotta do is call Cisco, give 'em your name, address and the details of your software acquisition ... if they sue you, you get your day in court (and can recover the legal fees if you're cleared). Let the system decide the issue.
"Fair Use" doesn't apply in this situation. I believe it would be easy to establish "harm" to Cisco by your illegal acquisiiton of their product.
<a target=new class=ftalternatingbarlinklarge href="http://www.cdw.com/shop/search/Results.aspx?
key=Cisco+IOS+for+2500+router">Commercially available at a fair price .... in this case, from CDW.</a>
FWIW
Scott
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread
Facebook
Twitter