Re: PJ lies about Terekhov--again

[Alexander Terekhov]

Rjack wrote:
[...]
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20091114101637997

I think that Judge Alsup drunktardly erred by failing to apply 
17 USC 117/109 in Psystar case.

The crux of his opinion is this:

"Psystar waived any Section 117 essential step defense when it 
failed to plead it. ... As such, Psystar has waived the defense. 
At all events, the assertion of Section 117 is so frivolous in 
the true context of how Psystar has used Mac OS X that a belated 
attempt to amend the pleadings would not be excused.2

2 Trying to have it both ways, Psystar successfully opposed 
Apple’s earlier attempt to reopen discovery and extend deadlines 
to add an additional product — Snow Leopard — to this action. 
Psystar now seeks to add a very late affirmative defense. This 
would not be fair."

And thus Psystar must be guilty of copyright infringement in 
spite of the governing Ninth Circuit's precedent clearly stating 
that "Section 117 defines a narrow category of copying that is 
lawful per se" and "Section 107, by contrast, establishes a 
defense to an otherwise valid claim of copyright infringement." 
Sega Enters. v. Accolade, Inc., 977 F.2d 1510, 1521 (9th Cir. 
1992).

BTW, regarding distribution right Judge Alsup contended:

"Psystar made an unauthorized copy of Mac OS X from a Mac mini 
that was placed onto an “imaging station” and then used a “master 
copy” to make many more unauthorized copies that were installed 
on individual Psystar computers. The first-sale defense does not 
apply to those unauthorized copies."

Uh drunktard...

The distribution of additional (installation copies) is explicitly 
covered by 117.

>From 

http://digital-law-online.info/CONTU/contu6.html

"This is in accord with the intent of that portion of the law 
which provides that owners of authorized copies of a copyrighted 
work may sell those copies without leave of the copyright 
proprietor.50

50 17 U.S.C. § 109(a)."

regards,
alexander.

--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(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.)