Re: CAFC took JMRI case under advisement

[Hyman Rosen]

rjack wrote:
> Eben Moglen is asking the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
> to overturn the clear and unequivocal language of the Supreme Court
> in De Forest Radio Tel. & Tel. Co. v. United States, 273 U.S. 236,
> United States Supreme Court (1927):
>     "Whether this [act] constitutes a gratuitous license, or one
>      for a reasonable compensation, must, of course, depend upon
>      the circumstances; but the relation between the parties
>      thereafter in respect of any suit brought must be held to be
>      contractual, and not an unlawful invasion of the rights of
>      the owner."

Here's the decision: <http://supreme.justia.com/us/273/236/case.html>.
First of all, the case was about a patent, not a copyright. Second,
the decision also says

    'Concede that, if the owner had said, "If you go on and infringe
     my patent, I shall not attempt to enjoin you, but I shall
     subsequently sue you for infringement," the tort would not be
     waived;'

and that is similar to language contained in the GPL.