GNUtian logic in action. GNUtian David Kastrup wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > David Kastrup wrote: > >> > >> Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > >> > Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: > >> >> > >> >> On Wed, 2006-02-01 at 11:43 +0100, Alexander Terekhov wrote: > >> >> > Barry Margolin wrote: > >> >> > [...] > >> >> > > But that's not really a good analogy. Combining two > >> >> > > programs is not just making references, you actually merge > >> >> > > parts of one program into a copy of the other. > >> >> > > >> >> > What do you mean by "merge". They remain as two separate > >> >> > computer programs (or parts thereof, if you like) under > >> >> > copyright law. No protected expression was > >> >> > transformed/modified forming a derivative work. Combined > >> >> > executable is just an aggregation of many computer program > >> >> > works under copyright law. If you insist I can supply you with > >> >> > maps that will allow you to extract all those distinct > >> >> > components. > >> >> > >> >> You can't include someone else's book into your own book unless > >> >> they allow so. > >> > > >> > 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. 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." regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
