Re: "GPL requirement could have a chilling effect on derivativedistros"

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> >> Yes, and a preparatory step for creating a CD can hardly be called a
>> >> preservational measure.
>> >
>> > I don't see why.
>> 
>> Because it is a copy on the way to a CD.
>
> But it may not end up on a CD unless I "prepare archival copies of it 
> to guard against destruction or damage by mechanical or electrical 
> failure" <digital-law-online.info/CONTU/contu6.html>.
>
>> > A CD may have a defect and/or burner can go kaputt right at 99%. Hey
>> > dak, even Time Warner got it right.
>> 
>> But rechristening the archival CD afterwards as something you can sell
>
> No. CD is not archival. The initial download is archival and it
> won't be retained after... "The sale of a copy of a program by a
> rightful possessor to another must be of all rights in the program,
> thus creating a new rightful possessor and destroying that status as
> regards the seller." (comtu6)

I am afraid that your interpretation of a twisty little maze of things
that are created for one purpose and retained for another is not going
to enthuse a court.

Again, the business of a court is not hide-and-seek and semantic
games.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum