In article <slm8m.53004$9p.17...@newsfe08.iad>, Hyman Rosen <hyro...@mail.com> wrote: > > <http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=fedclaim&vol=1999/9747 > 6c> > Thus, nonexclusive licenses are explicitly removed from the 204(a) > writing requirement. > ... > Under federal law, nonexclusive copyright licenses can be granted orally > or implied from conduct. > ... > The existence of either an exclusive or nonexclusive license creates an > affirmative defense to a claim of copyright infringement.
205(e) is the problematical section, not 204(a). -- --Tim Smith _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
