[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Red Hat pays $800,000 + costs for a patent deal

From: Linonut
Subject: Re: Red Hat pays $800,000 + costs for a patent deal
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 08:26:44 -0400
User-agent: slrn/ (Linux)

* Tim Smith peremptorily fired off this memo:

> In article <JdU4k.4882$>,
>  Linonut <linonut@bollsouth.nut> wrote:
>> * rjack peremptorily fired off this memo:
>> > Linonut wrote:
>> >
>> >>    The rights comprised in a copyright may be subdivided and
>> >>    transferred. 17 U.S.C. 201(d)(2) ("Any of the exclusive rights
>> >>    comprised in a copyright, including any subdivision of any of
>> >>    the rights specified by section 106, may be transferred as
>> >>    provided by clause (1) and owned separately."). In other words,
>> >>    a copyright holder may transfer the right to duplicate to one
>> >>    person, the right to distribute to another, and the right to
>> >>    produce derivative works to yet another. See ITOFCA Inc. v.
>> >>    MegaTrans Logistics, Inc., 322 F.3d 928, 929-30 (7th Cir.2003)
>> >>    ("Making and selling are distinct rights and you can assign one
>> >>    without the other."). 
>> >> 
>> >> Thanks for pointing me to that succinct validation of the methodology of
>> >> the GPL.
> You've confused a couple similar things, I'm afraid.  I will illustrate 
> with an example.

Don't bother, Tim.  I'll let each court make its own decisions.

As far as I can tell, rjack is simply a troll.  Who am I going to trust
more on the face of it?  A fellow who is a public figure and a lawyer,
or some anonymous troll?

Besides, even a simple discussion of, say, some operating system feature
can devolve into an endless bickering thread that gets nowhere.  How is
a legal issue going to be "solved" here, when even courts have to spend
days and weeks untangling legal issues?

Finally, rjack and Terekhov seem to get joy from (for example) Red Hat
getting sued over open-source software and having to pay money to ensure
that end-users can use "patented" software.  Distasteful.  It's "just
desserts" with Microsoft, but not Red Hat.

Just in terms of allocation of time resources, religion is not very
efficient.  There's a lot more I could be doing on a Sunday morning.
   -- Bill Gates, TIME magazine Vol. 149, No. 2 (13 January 1997)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]