[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar

From: Rjack
Subject: Re: Copyright Misuse Doctrine in Apple v. Psystar
Date: Sun, 22 Feb 2009 21:16:35 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20081209)

Rahul Dhesi wrote:
Rjack <> writes:

Section 3 of the GPL incorporates Section 2 which is rendered unenforceable due to 17 USC 301(a)....

Copyright invalid because federal law supersedes state law? What a headline that would make.

You've got it backwards Rahul. *Contract* (the GPL) invalid because
federal law supersedes state law. Ever hear of the Supremacy Clause?

"This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be
made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be
made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme
Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound
thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the
contrary notwithstanding."; United States Constitution Article VI

Now if you could only get some defendant to actually argue this.

And by the way, you managed to contradict yourself. Only recently
 you complained that the CAFC was ignoring state law.

WTF does the CAFC and the Artistic License have to do with the GPL?

Now you're saying that state law doesn't matter anyway. What a tangled web.

"Oh what a tangled web we weave,
When first we practise to deceive!"
Sir Walter Scott, Marmion, Canto vi. Stanza 1

The biggest problem with all your reasoning so far is that the courts and the defendants don't seem to see it your way.

That's because the F.S.F. will NEVER, NEVER voluntarily allow a
federal judge to interpret the GPL on the merits.

Rjack :)

reply via email to

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