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

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

Re: US court says software is owned, not licensed


From: amicus_curious
Subject: Re: US court says software is owned, not licensed
Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 17:17:30 -0400


"David Kastrup" <address@hidden> wrote in message news:address@hidden
Alexander Terekhov <address@hidden> writes:

Hyman Rosen wrote:
[...]
You miss the essential difference - when you download a copy of
a GPLed program, it is you who is making the copy, and therefore
you are bound by the license (if you choose to be; if not, then

Let NYSD.USCOURTS.GOV know about that, Hyman. <chuckles>

http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/pdf/D02NYSC/01-07482.PDF

<quote>

unlike the user of Netscape Navigator or other click-wrap or shrink-
wrap licensees, the individual obtaining SmartDownload is not made
aware that he is entering into a contract. SmartDownload is available
from Netscape's web site free of charge. Before downloading the
software, the user need not view any license agreement terms or even
any reference to a license agreement, and need not do anything to
manifest assent to such a license agreement other than actually
taking possession of the product. From the user's vantage point,
SmartDownload could be analogized to a free neighborhood newspaper,
readily obtained from a sidewalk box or supermarket counter without
any exchange with a seller or vender. It is there for the taking.

[...]

But I can't take the "free neighbourhood newspaper", snap photographs of
its underwear models and sell them to underwear admirers.  That is, I am
free to take the literal existing copies.  I can hand them on.  But
nothing allows me to create my own copies with my own copying mechanism
or _modify_ existing copies and create derivatives for distributing.

What I _can_ do is grab every free neighbourhood newspaper I can get and
sell them on Ebay.  But I can't make my own copies or modifications
without permission and distribute them as original works.

Certainly you could take them and stuff your own articles wherein you might comment on the original or even add information not provided by the original inside and give the combination away.


reply via email to

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