Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled

[RJack]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> On 2/22/2010 6:15 PM, RJack wrote:
> > Show me the exclusive right to attribution in the Copyright Act
>
> There is no exclusive right to attribution. There is the exclusive 
> right to authorize copying and distribution. Such authorization may 
> be conditional on the copier performing certain actions, and if the 
> copier copies and distributes without doing those actions, he is 
> infringing the exclusive rights of the holders.

Only if those "conditions" or "certain actions" limit the *specific*
exclusive rights of copying or distribution of the author.

"An unlicensed use of the copyright is not an infringement unless it
conflicts with one of the specific exclusive rights conferred by the
copyright statute. Twentieth Century Music Corp. v. Aiken, 422 U.S., at
154-155."; SONY CORP. OF AMER. v. UNIVERSAL CITY STUDIOS, INC., 464 U.S.
417 (1984).

The Artistic License broadly *permits* copying and distribution just as
Judge White originally found when he applied the correct Supreme Court
precedents. Contractual covenants aren't grant conditioners. No end runs
around the Supreme Court Hyman.

"Captain Moglen scared them out of the water!"
http://www.fini.tv/blog/finishing_line_files/a44f9390355368f87dc47b7ec094f93e-36.php

ROFL. ROFL. ROFL.

Sincerely,
RJack :)