[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Time to put up or shut up!
From: |
Hyman Rosen |
Subject: |
Re: Time to put up or shut up! |
Date: |
Tue, 04 May 2010 16:15:44 -0000 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0 |
On 4/14/2010 2:35 PM, RJack wrote:
". . . provided that you also meet *all* of these
conditions:. . ."
Condition 2(b) adds the qualification "work that you
distribute or publish". The phrasing might be a bit
awkward, but the meaning is clear. Language cleanup
was one of the reasons for GPLv3, of course.
How do you cause the event ". . . the modified files to carry prominent
notices" when it is a precondition to permission to "You may modify your
copies. . ."?
The condition is a limitation on what the altered files
may look like. It is nonsensical to assume that copyright
infringement occurs due to the intermediate steps involved
in producing a permitted alteration. For example, no
publisher's contract with an author explicitly authorizes
the publisher to create intermediate copies for the process
of producing a book, such as printing plates or digital copies.
But an author suing for infringement on those grounds would get
laughed out of court, not least for your favorite "promissory
estoppel".
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, (continued)
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, RJack, 2010/05/04
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, RJack, 2010/05/04
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!,
Hyman Rosen <=
- Re: Time to put up or shut up!, RJack, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement, David Kastrup, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement, RJack, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement, David Kastrup, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/05/04
- Re: SFLC stipulated dismissal of Comtrend without any settlement, Hyman Rosen, 2010/05/04