"Not Exactly".. there is a court case (MAI Systems Corp. vs Peak Computer Inc 991 F.2d 511) holding that copying from storage media into computer ram *IS* actionable copyright infringement. A specific exemption was written into the copyright statutes for computer _programs_ (but *NOT* 'data') that the owner of the computer hardware has a legal right to use.
I wouldn't draw any special conclusions from this case. For some reason, Peak did not raise a 17 USC 109 (ordinary use / first sale) defense, which would be the obvious defense to use in this case. Whether this is because their lawyers are stupid or because the specific facts of this case prohibit such a defense, I do not know. This does not seem to have been an ordinary sale, so that defense may not have been available to them. If so, the holding in this case has no bearing in the case where a person purchased a copyright work the ordinary way. But in the ordinary case, you can copy a copyrighted work if that is reasonably required for the ordinary use of that work. Otherwise, you couldn't lawfully color in a coloring book you had purchased because that would create a derivative work which violates copyright. When you purchase a work, you get the right to the ordinary use of that work. That's what you are paying for, in fact. By law, and by common sense, "ordinary use" includes anything reasonably necessary for ordinary use. This is for the same reason the right to "drive my car" includes the right to put the keys in the ignition. DS