Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals

[Alexander Terekhov]

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> 
> On 12/21/2010 10:56 AM, Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > Essentially, the Ninth Circuit concluded that the
> > breach of a license agreement must implicate one of the exclusive rights
> > of copyright to give rise to a copyright infringement claim:  "[W]e have
> > held that the potential for infringement exists only where the
> > licensee's action (1) exceeds the license's scope (2) in a manner that
> > implicates one of the licensor's exclusive statutory rights."
> 
> Yes, exactly. Copying and distributing outside the permissions
> granted by the GPL satisfies both of these. The court gave an
> example itself, of creating a derivative work.

Uh silly Hyman. The scope of the GPL is unlimited to begin with. Limited
or not, violations NOT "in a manner that implicates one of the
licensor's exclusive statutory rights" are not copyright infringements.
How the fuck the "manner" of *not* providing source code could ever
implicate one of the licensor's exclusive statutory rights? That's
possible only in the GNU land under the GNUish copyleft act (not to be 
confused with US copyright act).

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.)