[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation

From: RJack
Subject: Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 15:29:27 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090812)

Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 2/10/2010 2:09 PM, RJack wrote:
"Posted On: September 7, 2009 by David Johnson Good Copyright
Registration "Hygiene" Necessary to Obtain Copyright Protection
over Revised Versions of Software"

 Settlement disagreement leads to copyright ... claims ... The court
found that SG was entitled to an injunction against copyright
infringement. ... The injunction, however, would only extend to the
particular versions of the programs over which the court had proper
subject matter jurisdiction. The Second Circuit doesn’t allow the
kind of general prophylactic injunction that other circuits do.
(Query whether this rule will fall along with the Second Circuit’s
ruling rejecting the Tasini settlement, when the Supreme Court does
reverse.) SG’s remedy for other infringements is to register the
other versions.

Notice that last sentence. As usual, the links posted by the cranks demonstrate against their theories.

Three things Hyman.

1) The link:
isn't my link

2) Did you notice the future tense in your cite, "... when the Supreme
Court does reverse" ? You got a direct line to Antonin Scalia?
"Assume" will make an *ASS* out of *U* and ME*.

3) The NEW YORK TIMES CO. V. TASINI, 533 U.S. 483 (2001)  decision
concerned *distribution* of established collective works -- not
registration of ongoing derivative works.

So please explain Hyman, WTF are talking about?

"The Captain's scared them out of the water!"


RJack :)

reply via email to

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