Re: Psystar's legal reply brief in response to Apple

[Hyman Rosen]

On 8/3/2010 10:07 AM, RJack wrote:
> An exclusive right to distribute a derivative work "as a whole"
> is nowhere mentioned in the Copyright Act.

The copyright act grants the holder of a copyright the
exclusive right to permit how a work may be copied. This
includes being copied as part of a larger work. The GPL
permits a work to be copied as part of a larger work only
if that work as a whole is distributed under the GPL.

> This lack of an exclusive right to distribute a derivative work "as a
> whole" was explained to PJ and her ilk by Daniel Wallace when Maureen
> O'Gara published these facts in Feb. 2004 in Linux Business News.

Daniel Wallace has has a notable lack of success "explaining"
his theories to a court.

> A federal court actually reviewing the GPL on the merits means the death
> of the GPL.

The GPL is a simple and straightforward license and it will easily
pass muster with a court, as in fact it already glancingly has. The
only people who purport to see difficulty with the GPL are those who
do not wish to abide by its requirements or who don't wish to abide
by copyright law.