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

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

Re: The SFLC dismissals should be coming soon


From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: The SFLC dismissals should be coming soon
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 2010 17:36:50 +0100

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> 
> On 2/17/2010 10:36 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > Got it now?
> 
> <http://www.softwarefreedom.org/resources/2009/busybox-complaint-2009-12-14.pdf>
>      SOFTWARE FREEDOM CONSERVANCY, INC. and
> 

Hyman, you're really crank.

http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F3/402/881/510088/

"Eden apparently believed that a third basis for standing under the
Copyright Act existed, namely authorization by the copyright holder of
suit by a person other than an exclusive licensee. Clause 9 of the 1975
Eden/Paddington agreement ... contemplates such an arrangement. We do
not believe that the Copyright Act permits holders of rights under
copyrights to choose third parties to bring suits on their behalf. While
F.R. Civ. P. 17(a) ordinarily permits the real party in interest to
ratify a suit brought by another party, the Copyright Law is quite
specific in stating that only the "owner of an exclusive right under a
copyright" may bring suit."

http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/ratification

"A principal can, for example, ratify something that has been done on
his or her behalf by another individual who assumed the authority to act
in the capacity of an agent. "

http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F3/402/881/510088/

"We do not believe that the Copyright Act permits holders of rights
under copyrights to choose third parties to bring suits on their behalf.
While F.R. Civ. P. 17(a) ordinarily permits the real party in interest
to ratify a suit brought by another party, the Copyright Law is quite
specific in stating that only the "owner of an exclusive right under a
copyright" may bring suit."

Got it now you retard Hyman?

regards,
alexander.

P.S. "It is just like a suit to enforce a copyright license, which
arises under state law rather than under the Copyright Act. "

Hyman's lovin' http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Gaiman_v._McFarlane

P.P.S. "We do not believe that the Copyright Act permits holders of
rights under copyrights to choose third parties to bring suits on their
behalf. While F.R. Civ. P. 17(a) ordinarily permits the real party in
interest to ratify a suit brought by another party, the Copyright Law is
quite specific in stating that only the "owner of an exclusive right
under a copyright" may bring suit."

Hyman's lovin'
http://cases.justia.com/us-court-of-appeals/F3/402/881/510088/

--
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]