[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: RAM copies limited

From: Rjack
Subject: Re: RAM copies limited
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 2009 11:01:30 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090302)

Hyman Rosen wrote:
Rjack wrote:
I just found that is utterly flabbergasting in its implications

Really? They read the law and applied it. Why would you find a correctly reasoned argument to be flabbergasting? Oh, wait...

A typical PC with a GHZ clock could read segments of a computer
program into memory and execute and wipe that memory in microseconds.

17 USC § 101 A work is “fixed” in a tangible medium of expression
when its embodiment in a copy or phonorecord, by or under the authority of the author, is sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for a period of more than transitory duration.

Just because you would like something to be a copyright violation
 doesn't it make it so. Don't you tell that to GPL proponents?

Uh. . . moron, I find it flabbergasting that the court overturned
prevailing circuit precedent. I never intimated that I wished it to
establish infringement. The decision may have the potential to
circumvent the reproduction right concerning computers, which I
find establishes a basis for very interesting speculation.

You simply wish to reflexively oppose anything I state i any
opinion whatsoever. I'll bet if I claimed that horse turds didn't
look tasty, you'd eat one and then claim they were delicious.

Rjack :)

reply via email to

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