[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 CircuitC
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourt of Appeals |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Dec 2010 20:05:52 +0100 |
Hyman Rosen wrote:
[...]
> Sure. The defendants didn't do any copying, and the first
A copy made under license also falls under 17 USC 109 if/when the
licensor doesn't retain the title to the copy made.
"Feel free to make a single a copy of my work."
This license has a scope limitation (only one copy). Note that the
licensor doesn't retain the title to the copy made.
The copy made under the license falls under first sale.
> sale doctrine did away with restrictions on redistribution.
>
> > The pivotal issue was whether the copies sold by the defendant were
> > copies which had been the subject of a first sale, thereby terminating
> > their statutory protection:
>
> Wells was decided before the language of "lawfully made under
> this title" was law.
That does not matter. Wells has nothing to do with importation of copies
made abroad. There is no connection to the recent Omega case.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Code/Title_17/Chapter_1/Section_109
The drafters provided some clear examples and explanations regarding
contract v. copyright:
"A library that has acquired ownership of a copy is entitled to lend it
under any conditions it chooses to impose. This does not mean that
conditions on future disposition of copies or phonorecords, imposed by a
contract between their buyer and seller, would be unenforceable between
the parties as a breach of contract, but it does mean that they could
not be enforced by an action for infringement of copyright."
regards,
alexander.
--
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm
(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.)
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, (continued)
- Message not available
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourt of Appeals,
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, RJack, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, David Kastrup, 2010/12/22
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourt of Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourt of Appeals, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), ajawamnet, 2010/12/09
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), RJack, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), Joe Fineman, 2010/12/08