Isaac wrote: [...] > While it's true that some courts have decided that, the majority position > seems to be otherwise. I'm not sure which court decision that line is > from, but I suspect we can find decisions from other district courts > in CA contrary to this one.
Regarding 17 USC 117, take also this: http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data2/circs/2nd/039303p.pdf My reading of it is that even under contractual restrictions, 17 USC 117 bars cause of action for copyright infringement when "the party exercises sufficient incidents of ownership over a copy of the program to be sensibly considered the owner of the copy for purposes of § 117(a)." regards, alexander. _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnufirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss