[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Pee Jay says silence is golden

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: Pee Jay says silence is golden
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 2009 10:54:13 +0100

Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> The complaint you refer to elsewhere states that Erik Andersen is _a_
> copyright holder, not _the_ copyright holder.

The copyright registration names only Erik as author and claimant, not
Erik et al or some such.

Moglen himself wrote that

"If there are multiple authors of a copyrighted work, successful
enforcement depends on having the cooperation of all authors.

In order to make sure that all of our copyrights can meet the
recordkeeping and other requirements of registration... "

So stop spouting bullshit, silly Alan.

See "Adding Mutiple Authors" and "Adding Mutiple Claimants".

and also

"Thomson's request for a declaratory judgment establishing her
co-authorship under the Copyright Act of 1976, 17 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq.,
requires us to interpret and apply the copyright ownership provisions of
the Act. The Copyright Act defines a "joint work" as "a work prepared by
two or more authors with the intention that their contributions be
merged into inseparable or interdependent parts of a unitary whole." 17
U.S.C. § 101 (1994). The touchstone of the statutory definition "is the
intention at the time the writing is done that the parts be absorbed or
combined into an integrated unit." H.R.Rep. No. 1476, 94th Cong. 120,
121 (1976), reprinted in 1976 U.S.Code Cong. & Admin. News 5659, 5735.

Joint authorship entitles the co-authors to equal undivided interests in
the whole work--in other words, each joint author has the right to use
or to license the work as he or she wishes, subject only to the
obligation to account to the other joint owner for any profits that are
made. See 17 U.S.C. § 201(a); Childress, 945 F.2d at 508; Community for
Creative Non-Violence v. Reid, 846 F.2d 1485, 1498 (D.C.Cir.1988)
("Joint authors co-owning copyright in a work are deemed to be tenants
in common, with each having an independent right to use or license the
copyright, subject only to a duty to account to the other co-owner for
any profits earned thereby."), aff'd. without consideration on this
point, 490 U.S. 730, 109 S.Ct. 2166, 104 L.Ed.2d 811 (1989)."


(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.)

reply via email to

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