[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 21:37:19 +0200

No, the District Court had it right. If your license says "you can copy
this software provided you do X, Y, and Z", then you have a license to
copy the software. No doing X, Y, and Z violates the license, but does
not violate copyright law.

I can't make a license that says, "you can copy this software provided
you don't pick your nose" and then sue you for copyright infringement
for picking your nose.

Because lawsuits for copyright infringement have special powers (like
statutory damages and a presumption of irreparable harm), we can't let
people decide what's copyright infringement just by writing it in a
license. Congress has to do that.

This ruling is very wrong and very troubling.


(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards
too, whereas GNU cannot.)

reply via email to

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