Re: Compliance detection tool

[RJack]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> On 4/20/2010 9:31 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > With one court
>
> And how many court decisions have supported the crank point of view 
> while addressing open licenses?

In 1984 the Supreme Court held:

"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 Federal Circuit found:

"It is outside the scope of the Artistic License to modify and
distribute the copyrighted materials without copyright notices and a
tracking of modifications from the original computer files."

This finding directly contradicts the Supreme Court's ruling that to
infringe, an action must violate one of the "specific exclusive rights
conferred by the copyright statute".

"[U]nless we wish anarchy to prevail within the federal judicial system,
a precedent of this Court must be followed by the lower federal courts
no matter how misguided the judges of those courts may think it to be.";
HUTTO v. DAVIS, 454 U.S. 370 (1982).

Which court's ruling do you think is binding precedent?

"ARTICLE 224
Condition Defined:
A condition is an event, not certain to occur, which must occur,
unless its non-occurrence is excused, before performance under
a contract becomes due."; Restatement (Second) of Contracts.
http://openjurist.org/661/f2d/479/fantastic-fakes-inc-v-pickwick-international-inc

precendent -- adj. (pr-sdnt, prs-dnt)
Preceding.
[Middle English, from Old French, from Latin praecdns, praecdent-,
present participle of praecdere, to go before; see precede.]


"As a general rule, it must clearly appear from the agreement itself
that the parties intended a provision to operate as a condition
precedent (see, 22 N.Y. Jur 2d, Contracts 234; Lui v Park Ridge at
Terryville Assn., 196 A.D.2d 579, 601 N.Y.S.2d 496). If the language is
in any way ambiguous, the law does not favor a construction which
creates a condition precedent (see, Lui v Park Ridge at Terryville
Assn., supra, at 582; Manning v Michaels
9 A.D.2d 897, 540 N.Y.S.2d 583)."; KASS V KASS, SUPREME COURT OF NEW
YORK, APPELLATE DIVISION, SECOND DEPARTMENT Cause No. 19970908_0054.NY

"Plaintiffs bring claims for "Contract Failure of Condition" against
each defendent. The Court is not familiar with this term. I assume
"Contract Failure of Condition" is a claim for breach of a condition
precedent." Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank, et al. v. Morgan Stanley & Co.,
et al., 1:2008cv07508, SDNY, (2008). Judge Shira A. Scheindlin, Diasrict
Court judge presiding over Best Buy et. al.

http://amlawdaily.typepad.com/AbuDhabi.pd

Sincerely,
RJack :)