David Kastrup wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > GNUtian logic in action. > > > > GNUtian David Kastrup wrote: > >> > >> Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >> > David Kastrup wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> >> > > >> >> > One can download a copy of GPL'd work (without any "I accept") > >> >> > directly to a compilation on a tangible medium. In source code > >> >> > or object code form (both forms are wildly available). > >> >> > >> >> The mere presence of duplicable material somewhere does not give > >> >> you any automatic right to create copies of it. > >> >> > >> >> If somebody leaves his door open, that does not mean that this > >> >> gives me the right to go inside and take or copy whatever I > >> >> wish. > >> > > >> > Go tell this to Honorable ALVIN K. HELLERSTEIN, U.S.D.J. > >> > >> No need to: > >> > >> > http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov/courtweb/pdf/D02NYSC/01-07482.PDF > >> > > >> > "Netscape's SmartDownload, ... allows a user to download and use > >> > the software without taking any action that plainly manifests assent > >> > to the terms of the associated license ... Netscape argues that the > >> > mere act of downloading indicates assent. However, downloading is > >> > hardly an unambiguous indication of assent. The primary purpose of > >> > downloading is to obtain a product, not to assent to an agreement. > >> > ... Netscape's failure to require users of SmartDownload to > >> > indicate assent to its license as a precondition to downloading and > >> > using its software is fatal to its argument that a contract has been > >> > formed. > >> > >> "Contract". See? The GPL explicitly states: > >> > >> 5. You are not required to accept this License, since you have not > >> signed it. However, nothing else grants you permission to modify or > >> distribute the Program or its derivative works. These actions are > >> prohibited by law if you do not accept this License. Therefore, by > >> modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the > >> Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and > >> all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying > >> the Program or works based on it. > >> > >> In the court case you cited, the judge decided that if a copyright > >> holder makes something available for download without further > >> technical measures to announce its licence, then no contract is > >> formed and the recipient is merely bound by copyright law if he > >> decides to ignore the license. > >> > >> But copyright law does not allow you redistribution of copies. > > > > It does. 17 USC 109, idiot. > > You are losing it. You always resort to insults when running out of > arguments. > > > See also > > > > http://www.copyright.gov/reports/studies/dmca/sec-104-report-vol-1.pdf > > > > "There is no dispute that section 109 applies to works in digital > > form. Physical copies of works in a digital format, such as CDs or > > DVDs, are subject to section 109 in the same way as physical copies > > in analog form. Similarly, a lawfully made tangible copy of a > > digitally downloaded work, such as a work downloaded to a floppy > > disk, Zip disk, or CD-RW, is clearly subject to section 109." > > "lawfully made". There is no law that permits you making copies of > whatever you may come across on the web. You need the permission of > the copyright holder. There is permission implied in the act of > making the stuff available for download, but it is certainly a stretch > to assume that this implied permission would cover an unlimited number > of downloads for the sole purpose of artifically and nominally > circumventing the restrictions on the number and use of copies for > _personal_ use that copyright law permits. > > In general, courts don't react favorably to trickery intended to > circumvent the intent of a law.
Handwaving. Go tell it to Microsoft. I'm eagerly awaiting to be sued. In addition to a copy of winxp64 download (which was meant for you my dear dak -- recall it?) that I sold on ebay, the rest (14 copies) went on sale recently on debian-legal. http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/01/msg00161.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/01/msg00177.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/01/msg00466.html BTW, consolidated know-how on escaping the GPL can be found in that "Distributing GPL software" thread on debian-legal. And it's free as in beer. http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/01/msg00163.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/01/msg00166.html http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2006/01/msg00174.html and etc. Enjoy. regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
