Ciaran O'Riordan wrote:
rjack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
[...]the license is preempted by 17 USC sec 301.[...]
And since invalidating the GPL would be worth billions to some companies, how
do you explain that your discovery (and that of Alexander Terekhov) are
ignored by everyone in a position to act?
I see you have shifted the topic from the specific legal enforceability question
under U.S. law to that of a speculative question of motivations based upon
dubious assumptions.
Who, pray tell, are these mysterious billion dollar companies and what would
their business model resemble?
Sincerely,
Rjack
-- "[I]f an extra element is required instead of or in addition to the acts of
reproduction, performance, distribution or display in order to constitute a
state-created cause of action, there is no preemption, provided that the extra
element changes the nature of the action so that it is qualitatively different
from a copyright infringement claim." Stromback v. New Line Cinema, 384 F.3d 283
(United States Court Of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit 2004) --
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
