gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: [!NEWS] The GNUtards Must Be Crazy


From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: [!NEWS] The GNUtards Must Be Crazy
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 19:12:33 +0100

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. 
-----

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.)


reply via email to

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