Re: JMRI case -- Implementation of the Federal Circuit's Opinion

[David Kastrup]

Rjack <me@there.com> writes:

> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
>> http://jmri.net/k/docket/227.pdf
>
>> Lastly, Plaintiff must prove a likelihood of success on the merits or
>> a fair chance of success on the merits of his copyright claim.
>
> It's a loooooooong way from over. The Federal Circuit ruled narrowly on
> whether the terms were "covenants" or "conditions" and that's all --
> discovery has yet to be initiated concerning the merits of the case.
>
> Contract "conditions" and "covenants" are both "contract terms". Terms
> of a contract are subject to the rules of contract interpretation
> whether they are covenants or conditions.
>
> Consider:
>
> "You may copy my work if you *promise* to murder your mother" and
> another that states, "You may copy my work *provided that* you murder
> your mother". One contains a contract covenant the other a contract
> condition but they are both illegal terms that are held against the
> drafter of the contract.
>
> Copyright preemption, illegal terms ("against public policy"), mutual
> mistake, and impossibility of terms (among a thousand other rules) have
> yet to be examined under the Federal Circuit's implimentation of
> "condition" versus "covenant".

With your remarkable grasp of legal matters I would not be overly
surprised if you considered dumping your household garbage in a cemetery
to be perfectly feasible since their policies of only burying dead
persons amounts to asking for murder and thus any of their conditions
and tariffs need not be heeded.

> Anyone remember Yogi Berra's "It ain't over 'till it's over"?

When only isolated lunatics remain, it is over.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum