[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement

From: Hyman Rosen
Subject: Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement
Date: Tue, 04 May 2010 16:12:59 -0000
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv: Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0

On 4/8/2010 5:57 PM, RJack wrote:
"BusyBox, v.0.60.3" is the version of BusyBox registered with the
Copyright Office by the plaintiff

According to the complaint
this is a version registered by the plaintiff. The complaint
does not say that it is the only version so registered.

> and is the only copyrighted work claimed in the lawsuit.

No, that is plainly false, easily seen to be so by reading
the complaint. The copyrighted work which the plaintiffs
claim is being infringed is BusyBox, not nay particular
version of it. This is correct, since the plaintiffs hold
copyright to all versions of BusyBox from the one in which
they first made modifications.

The claim-processing requirements of 17 USC sec 411 (no longer
jurisdictional after Reed Elsevier, Inc. v. Muchnick, Case No. 08-103)
require the alleged infringed work be registered with specificity.

The plaintiffs can register any later version as becomes
necessary and amend the complaint. The defendants might
then not be liable for statutory infringement on that
version, but could be enjoined from copying and distributing
it further.

It is the job of the trier of fact to compare the *registered* work with
the alleged infringing copy for "substantial similarity". In the instant
suit, no binary has been *registered* for comparison with the alleged
infringing binary. I'll leave it to you to explain how a jury would
compare a work that you *refuse* to identify with *specificity* with
some *alleged* infringing work.

No, this is false. You really are ignorant in this subject.
    321.03 Relationship between source code and object code.
    The Copyright Office considers source code and object code as two
    representations of the same computer program. For registration
    purposes, the claim is in the computer program rather than in any
    particular representation of the program. Thus separate registrations
    are not appropriate for the source code and object code representations
    of the same computer program. However, where a work in source code is
    registered in unpublished form, and the published version of the same
    work is submitted for registration in object code form, registration
    will be made.

reply via email to

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