[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: Hadron
Subject: Re: Red Hat pays $800,000 + costs for a patent deal
Date: Sun, 15 Jun 2008 15:46:13 +0200
User-agent: emacs 23.0.0

Linonut <linonut@bollsouth.nut> writes:

> * 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.

LOL. Liarnut now refuses corrections.

> As far as I can tell, rjack is simply a troll.  Who am I going to
> trust

You use that phrase a lot "as far as I can tell". Well, it's not far I'm

> 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?

Thats funny. Ask Rick. He seems to think Hans Reiser was found guilty
simply based on the fact that the jury didn't like him! He even went on
to suggest that the only reason Reiser claims to know the location of
the body is that he might have seen someone else put it there!

> 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.

So, as a professional programmer you release all your source code for
free for some OSS head to release a "Free and for  free" version and
thus put you out of a job do you?

You're a hypocrite.

- "Just think, consumers are not sold on XP, and Microsoft shelled out
some  major $$$ to develop this thing. This is a great opportunity for
alternative operating systems to intercept the ball, and run it back for a
touchdown.": comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

reply via email to

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