I'm no copyright lawyer, but I do know that in many cases it is completely legal and acceptable to photocopy existing works, either in part or in entirety. This falls under the "fair use" section of copyright law.
It is a somewhat fuzzy area as to what constitutes fair use, but two big factors are whether or not you intend to profit from selling copyrighted works, and whether the works are currently available at a reasonable price (i.e. still in print and available for retail purchase).
I'd be willing to bet that having a copy of either of these books made by a legitimate owner (this would include a public library) would be viewed as "fair use" by a copyright lawyer. Now, if he tried to sell it for any amount of money, goods, or services, that would probably be breaking the law.
The statement in red is probably true for a different reason that you think.
I also believe some lawyers would tell you that , even though they knew it was not true!
If they don't have a client , they can't charge a fee!
Now when you go in front of a judge who you are not paying to tell you what you want to hear, uh oh , mean old reality.
Fair use in copying something like a book , is referring to a quote or quotes from a book for journalistic uses or possibly copying some pages that are missing from an original book that you own to make a complete book.
NOT copying the whole book.
Ignoratia juris non excusat would be the term you would most likely hear when you were in court.
Ignorance of the law is no excuse!
Copyright infringement is a very serious offense {especially if you have something of value that can be taken from you!}
People who own nothing substantial and have no assets that can be traced , probably have very little to worry about , most people aren't going to pursue them because of the expense , but if you have enough to make a payday ??????
Also , you may get lucky and copy something from an eccentric, who doesn't care that it costs him 10 grand , he just wants to put a judgement on you in case you ever get anything that he can take it away.
If you ever heard of lawyers who are ambulance chasers , multiply that times 1000, because when you go to court , all they have to do is show that the person they represent owns the copyright , you lose , no muss, no fuss, you lose.
The purpoose of copyright laws is not as some of you seem to believe
"to keep the little guy from having access", it is to keep the "big guys" from stealing everyones ideas and work, and making copies and selling them 10,000 to 1 over you because they can produce and distribute items so much easier and cheaper.