RJack<user@example.net> writes:
On 9/11/2010 12:00 PM, David Kastrup wrote:
RJack<user@example.net> writes:
Puts a bullet through Alexander's strange "once it was not provably
an illegal copy, I can do whatever I want with it without heeding the
agreement under which I had been entitled to make a copy" theory.
Puts a bullet in the hands of thousands of GPL software developers
to demand ownership of the shiny platters on your hard drive or
the flash ram in your new Kingston SSD.
Seems like you are confused again. This verdict was _for_ the
plaintiff, the copyright holder, not against it.