[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: JMRI case -- Implementation of the Federal Circuit's Opinion

From: Hyman Rosen
Subject: Re: JMRI case -- Implementation of the Federal Circuit's Opinion
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 2009 14:49:48 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090605)

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
And on basis of what law do you think that Appeelees are obliged to let
third parties know about those "extra permissions granted to them by the
copyright holder, above those allowed by copyright law"

17 USC 106(3) <>
    Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of
    copyright under this title has the exclusive rights
    to do and to authorize any of the following:
    (3) to distribute copies or phonorecords of the
        copyrighted work to the public by sale or other
        transfer of ownership, or by rental, lease, or

The terms of distribution are under the control of the
copyright holder, as when he separately authorizes the
creation of hardcover and paperback copies of a book.
In the case of open licenses, one of the requirements
is that distribution be accompanied by the license.

An "if" hypothetical is not evidence.

There is no need for evidence. One of the purposes of
an amicus brief is to point out possible consequences
of a decision, including to parties outside the case.

The claims of a brief are not evidence either.

reply via email to

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