[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth Circuit

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals
Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2010 16:45:40 +0100

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> On 12/21/2010 9:48 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > that breach of a "condition" not to use bots doesn't violate the
> > copyright act. Why do you think that a copyleft "condition" not to
> > restrict users downstream should be treated any differently?
> Because the court itself said so:
> <>
>       For instance, ToU ยง 4(D) forbids creation of derivative works

Copyleft doesn't forbid creation of derivative works. You can create
derivative works from copylefted works all you want. You can also copy
verbatim. Copyleft does impose several WOW ToU-like covenants (with
covenants itself having really nothing to do with the rights under 17
USC 106) for the case of subsequent distribution of copies of derivative
works (ans/or copies verbatim). The distribution of copies made under
the GPL (whether verbatim or with modifications) itself falls under 17
USC 109 and hence isn't a copyright infringement by definition of 17 USC
109. Go read it, silly.


(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)

reply via email to

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