|The good news was |
that at last you could finally copy this ...
- The only relevant “harm” that would, in principle, need to be compensated for is the risk to rightholders of lost, duplicate sales. In the view of the Secretary of State, there was no automatic correlation between the desire to copy and lost sales; if the former was constrained the latter would not necessarily occur. As such, if a limited exception to copyright was introduced this would not impact upon duplicate sales.
- Sellers of content already price-in to the initial sale price - whether fully or in part - the fact that consumers treat content that they purchase as fair game when it comes to copying for personal use [so called "pricing-in principle"].
|.. The bad news now is that |
lack of compensation requirement
was not supported by sufficient evidence