[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT

From: Hyman Rosen
Subject: Re: and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 15:01:43 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20080708)

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
Given that you seem to so like the CAFC's ruling in the JMRI case, it
appears that you're not only in favor of copyright in general but also
want to strengthen the hand of the copyright holders by letting recovery
of the licensee's breaches under tort law, not contract... is that
right, Hyman? Just asking.

I believe that a copyright holder gets to set the terms under
which copies may be made and distributed, and if someone copies
and distributes without honoring those terms, he is liable for
copyright infringement, and the holder can sue to stop the
infringement and to recover statutory damages.

It doesn't much matter whether or not I'm in favor of copyright,
because it's not going away. Given that it exists, then the above
is the logical way for it to behave.

reply via email to

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