The Spectrum Monitor

Discussion in 'Ham Radio Discussions' started by VK4HAT, Sep 11, 2019.

ad: L-HROutlet
ad: l-rl
ad: Left-2
ad: Subscribe
ad: MessiPaoloni-1
ad: Left-3
ad: L-MFJ
  1. KV6O

    KV6O Ham Member QRZ Page

    Apples and Oranges. If you give someone a printed magazine, a DVD, a book, CD, record album, etc., you are giving them the physical, paid for "work" - not a copy.

    Paying for one subscription and distributing COPIES to others who are NOT paying is stealing. Do you shoplift as well?

    From the download, page 3 - "Copying or distribution of any part of this publication in any manner, electronic or paper, is prohibited without the express written permission of the publisher. " Stealing from the authors and publisher is theft, and if this publication folds because it can't sell the subscriptions is needs to keep afloat, who's to blame?

    I can't believe the attitudes of some people.
  2. WZ7U

    WZ7U Ham Member QRZ Page

    Ya know fellas, he is right about this. One copy is fine, but if you make and distribute over one (assuming you paid for the original), that is theft.

    But, hopefully the magazine in question will pick up some paid subscribers over all this hullabaloo and diaper wetting.
  3. VK4HAT

    VK4HAT Ham Member QRZ Page

    It all depends on the EULA. If it is just copyright and there are no clauses in the end user licence agreement restrict use to the digital work, then, that digital work can be treated just like any physical item. You may give away or resell your one copy you paid for. The devil is in the detail. This is why all the digital streaming services are no longer selling full albums and their EULA are a nightmare. You do not own anything you get from them. Ever. But, with this magazine, unless they make you sign an EULA that gives away your rights, you own that one copy and can do what you like with it. I have not subscribed, so I do not know if they even have an EULA. Just because something is digital does not mean you do not own it.
    N8AFT likes this.
  4. N8AFT

    N8AFT Subscriber QRZ Page

    Agn much to so about nothing significant.
    My conscience is clear....
    Ad revenue will somehow keep the rag in question afloat...
    Much lower cost to publish ANY digi mag theses days since there is no paper or postage costs.
  5. N8AFT

    N8AFT Subscriber QRZ Page

    I Agree... Hey Fred and Barb at Universal still have a brick/mortar radio store down the street.
    They advertise there. I just bet/I'm pretty sure/he would take the extra ad exposure without complaint.
  6. K9STH

    K9STH Platinum Subscriber Volunteer Moderator Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page


    You can dispose of your copy of the computer files legally IF you remove all of the files from your computer as well. Otherwise, you are definitely violating the Berne Convention by making ADDITIONAL copies available. Of course, if your country is not signatory to the Berne Convention, then you are free to do anything you wish so long as the copies are not distributed outside of your country.

    There are certain, especially Asian, countries that are signatory to the Berne Convention that routinely ignore copyrights and allow thousands, if not more, copies of material, especially computer files, to be illegally copied and sold including exporting those files.

    Are you familiar with the term "treble damages"? That is when 3-times the actual damage plus punitive damages can be awarded. Such is often applied where the Copyright Law is violated.

    Unfortunately, way too many Internet users do not have the slightest clue as to the copyright laws and, once copies "hit" the Internet, it is a practical impossibility to enforce those laws.

    Glen, K9STH
  7. W4NNF

    W4NNF XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Am I worried that They are coming after me because I was done with the .pdf of some online magazine and gave it to my buddy? Not really. They ain't REALLY gonna come get me, are they, OM?

  8. KT1F

    KT1F Ham Member QRZ Page

    I don't really know anything about copyright law, Berne Convention or whatever but to me that's all kind of a secondary issue.

    I think it's pretty simple that if a publication says the following then in any sort of good faith behavior, you shouldn't make a copy and send to someone else.
    It's not complicated but admittedly there is a range of violations.

    The grumpy "I paid for it so I'll do whatever I damn well like!" is a misunderstanding of what was paid for.

    If you give someone a copy and then that person becomes a subscriber then I guess if you asked the publisher quietly then they're not going to complain about the end result. But ... it's so easy to use that as a justification "well ... my friend is interested in this article, he might buy or might not but I'll send him a copy anyway."

    As for treating it like a paper publication where you pass one copy around. I'm not so sure about that. You can't really totally remove it from your ownership because, as a subscriber, you still have it available on the website. Now two people have it available for the price of one.

    As for "The advertisers don't mind". Of course not, that's just stating the obvious.

    I don't know anything about publishing but I'm guessing that the number of paid subscribers matter in terms of selling advertising and what they can charge even if the subscription price is small enough that someone will think they're not going to miss $3.
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2019
  9. KV6O

    KV6O Ham Member QRZ Page

    Keep justifying your behaviour. You are stealing. There is no additional ad revenue, there is revenue LOSS due to theft.

    I hope the publisher discovers your cavalier attitude about his/her revenue/income.
  10. K9STH

    K9STH Platinum Subscriber Volunteer Moderator Platinum Subscriber QRZ Page


    I am not saying that it will definitely happen to you. However, there have been individuals, with your attitude, that have been very unpleasantly surprised when a process server has showed up, on their doorstep, with a court summons, because of their violation of the Copyright Law.

    I have no idea as to how "handy" you are where building things are concerned. But, let us say that you built a picnic table for backyard dining and that table was in your yard. Then, a neighbor, without your permission, took the table for his / her use. You probably would be upset because, especially, you had put a lot of effort in building the table and now someone else is benefiting from your labor without paying for it. It is the same thing with intellectual property such as magazines / books or computer programs. Copying, distributing, etc., material without paying for the effort is akin to someone appropriating your picnic table.


    Generally, it is legal to copy a single article, small portion of the copyrighted material, etc., for discussion, education, application, etc. This is called "fair use". Libraries, educators, and similar are also allowed to make, and distribute, multiple copies of such articles, and so forth, to students and other participants. Again, "fair use". It is when the complete document is copied and distributed that the law is broken.

    Also, one can usually make a copy, scan, etc., copyrighted material for their personal use (assuming that what is being copied was acquired legally). For example, scanning a document to have the material saved in case the original hard copy document is damaged or destroyed. However, especially with certain computer programs, such copying is prohibited by the copyright owner and that information is publicized including being on a label, included pamphlet, etc. Also, if you give away, sell, trade, etc., the original hard copy, then, legally, you need to delete the retained material.

    The copyright owner can declare that the material can be copied, distributed, etc. In this situation, you are free to do so but also cannot charge for the material.

    Glen, K9STH

Share This Page