[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [News] SFLC Responds to Copyright Misconceptions, Presents MoglenT

From: Hyman Rosen
Subject: Re: [News] SFLC Responds to Copyright Misconceptions, Presents MoglenTalk
Date: Thu, 11 Feb 2010 10:50:10 -0500
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0

On 2/10/2010 6:37 PM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:

Hyman Rosen wrote:
All the plaintiffs need to show is that Andersen holds
copyright in a part of BusyBox, and that the defendants
are copying and distributing it without permission.

Larry Rosen correctly noted:

"Under US copyright law, only “the legal or beneficial owner of an
exclusive right is entitled ... to institute an action for any
infringement of that particular right...” 17 USC 501. So if all you have
is a non-exclusive license, or indeed if all you have is joint
ownership, you cannot enforce that copyright in court without the other
owners joining in. "

Fortunately, Erik Andersen is the legal or beneficial owner
of an exclusive right, not a non-exclusive right or a joint
ownership. He owns his exclusive right by being an author of
(some of) the content of BusyBox. BusyBox is not a joint work
because all of its authors have not declared their intention
that it be a joint work.

At some point, the New York bar will have no choice but to disbar the
entire gang of utterly incompetent GNU arch legal beagles from SFLC for
consistent filing of frivolous lawsuits

Every lawsuit filed by the SFLC has ended successfully with the
defendants coming into compliance with the GPL. I can only imagine
how much more could accomplished by competent attorneys!

reply via email to

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