Re: [!NEWS] The GNUtards Must Be Crazy

[Rjack]

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> Hyman Rosen wrote:
> [...]
> > It's just preemption. All copyright now comes only from this law.
> > The GPL is a copyright license. It is baffling how you construe this
> > to mean anything at all in the context of the GPL. It's as if you
> > believe chanting "17 USC sec. 301(a)" will magically change your
>
> See footnote 92 in BREAKING BARRIERS: THE RELATION BETWEEN CONTRACT 
> AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW By Raymond T. Nimmer:
>
> (consider that over time, under "bazaar model" with long chain of 
> derivation in derivative works and additions to collective works by 
> different authors, GPL'd IP becomes practically locked within the GPL 
> pool)
>
> -----
> Contracts do not involve the same basic scope or impact as do property 
> rights established directly by operation of common law or state statute. 
> This point was made in ProCD, Inc. v. Zeidenberg.89 Among other issues, 
> that case involved the claim that a contractual restriction on the use 
> of an uncopyrighted database was preempted because the subject matter 
> of the transaction was unprotectable under copyright law.90 The court
> correctly rejected this argument. It drew an explicit distinction 
> between a property right (potentially preempted) and a contract right. 
> "A copyright is a right against the world. Contracts, by contrast, 
> generally affect only their parties; strangers may do as they please, 
> so contracts do not create 'exclusive rights.'"91 This reflects the 
> transactional base of a contract and draws an important, relatively 
> explicit line for purposes of preemption claims. Enforcing a contract 
> between two parties leaves the subject matter of the contract (whether 
> copyrighted or not) entirely unencumbered by any contract issue as to 
> others not party to the transaction. Property rights and contract rights 
> are simply not equivalent.92
>
> 92. It can be argued that this might change if, in effect, no third 
> party can avoid being bound by the contract terms in order to use the 
> information. 
> -----

Beautiful citation Alexander!!! I missed that one.

Sincerely,
Rjack :)