DR>    No law degree, but I do study law in my spare time. 
WHY?? hahaha, isn't it wuite boring?? Although I guess staying on top of
it really would help! Most people break the law and do not know it! So 
that's a good thing I reckon!
DR>    Then a case in 1975 was heard.  In Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. 
DR> Aiken the court held that the owner of a fast food chicken store did 
DR> not infringe by playing a radio connected to four speakers in his 
DR> establishment.  The court said that the reception was not a 
DR> performance that belonged exclusively to the copyright owner for a 
DR> number of reasons (too deep to enumerate).
DR> 
DR>    Because of all the hair-splitting, the 1976 act inserted a whole 
DR> bunch of exemptions (one or two were to codify the Aiken case).  And I 
DR> believe that if a person rebroadcasts (via the telephone) and there is 
DR> no commercial gain (for the performance), that the equipment used 
DR> (receiving apparatus) is a "private home-type device," that the 
DR> broadcast that is being played is from a signal in the local reception 
DR> area and there is no "direct charge" for the listening - then folks 
DR> who pipe the music into their phone system have little to worry about. 
Ok, but what about where I work we have a local radio station on our 
hold system. I'm sure it's not a private home type device, but it 
isn't for our financial gain - I think we'd be putting an ad or 
soemthing on there if it were to get the customer to buy more stuff from
us, or to tell about our sales or something! So I would say it's just 
for thier entertainment while they are on hold. Ths seems ok to me 
though!
DR>    Hey, I am human.  I DO make mistakes.  And when I do, they are 
DR> usually boners!
We all do!!!!!
DR>    Yep, and proud to say I stole that one along with the other 200 or 
DR> so in the collection. 
That's where I get mine when I use my QWK mail reader that is!
Joe
--- GAPNet Enhanced
---------------