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

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

Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation


From: RJack
Subject: Re: Bye - Bye , open source derivative works litigation
Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2010 16:08:51 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.23 (Windows/20090812)

Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 2/10/2010 3:29 PM, RJack wrote:
1) The link: <http://tushnet.blogspot.com/2009/04/settlement-disagreement-leads-to.html>


isn't my link <http://www.digitalmedialawyerblog.com/2009/09/good_copyright_registration_hy_1.html>



But they are discussing the same case.

2) Did you notice the future tense in your cite, "... when the
Supreme Court does reverse" ?

Yes. That refers to "The Second Circuit doesn’t allow the kind of general prophylactic injunction that other circuits do." It does not
refer to "SG’s remedy for other infringements is to register the
other versions."

3) The NEW YORK TIMES CO. V. TASINI, 533 U.S. 483 (2001) decision concerned *distribution* of established collective works -- not registration of ongoing derivative works.

Again, that does not refer to "SG’s remedy for other infringements is
to register the other versions."

So please explain Hyman, WTF are talking about?

As my cite states, the court found that SG was entitled to an injunction against copyright infringement for those versions of its
work that it had registered. If it wanted injunctions for
infringement against the other versions, it could get those by first
registering those versions and then filing a claim.

WTF does that have to do with the Supreme Court and NEW YORK TIMES CO.
V. TASINI. TASANI didn't address blanket injunctions concerning
copyright registration in derivative works.

This applies tp GPLed programs in the same way.

Says who? POTUS or Moglen?

Even if a court chooses to enjoin only registered versions of GPLed
programs from being copied and distributed unless the GPL is honored,
the remedy for a copyright holder is simply to register the version so being copied and distributed and then file for injunction.

A court will NEVER, NEVER choose to enjoin a GPL program. A federal
judge will NEVER, NEVER get a chance to read the GPL if the SFLC has
anything to do with it. Automatic voluntary dismissals are neat aren't
they Hyman?

"The Captain's scared them out of the water!"
http://www.fini.tv/blog/finishing_line_files/a44f9390355368f87dc47b7ec094f93e-36.php

ROFL. ROFL. ROFL.

Sincerely,
RJack :)


reply via email to

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