[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: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 18:42:15 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20081209)

Hyman Rosen wrote:
Rjack wrote:

This provision is not in GPLv3, for what that's worth.

Congress forbid this kind of copyright control

For some unfathomable reason, you keep pointing to the preemption
clause as if it means something to the incorrect ideas you propose. It doesn't. In any case, the fallback provisions of the GPL are that if you cannot distribute under its terms, then you may not distribute at all, so no user will be denied his freedoms
 because of this.

Unfortunately your "fallback" provision, that a failed contract
cannot supply grounds for claims of promissory estoppel, is a
figment of Richard Stallman's fertile imagination -- the same
imagination that conjured up the idea that a copyright license was
not a contract.

The GPL is a public contract of adhesion and will be interpreted
strictly against the drafter.

It is time for you to admit that Congress writes the copyright laws and not socialist zealots like Richard Stallman.

Even socialist zealots are given the exclusive right to control how their copyrighted works are copied and distributed.
So long as the control is restricted by contractual privity.

Your bitterness and resentment of largess in which you may not participate must be gnawing at you painfully.

Oh goody! Oh boy! Now you're a friggin' psychotherapist.

I suggest that since you are incapable of dealing with GPLed software, just pretend it doesn't exist.

I suggest that since you are incapable of accepting legal reality,
you should probably avoid intellectual property discussions and
become a vegetable farmer.

Rjack :)

reply via email to

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