Hyman Rosen wrote: [...] > In the case of copyleft licenses, copiers who do not obey the > terms of the license are still copying . . . .
WoW gamers are also copying the game in order to play and even though the imbecile court ruled that such copying doesn't fall under 17 USC 117 (because the games are not owners of their WoW copies), it still held that breach of a "condition" not to use bots doesn't violate the copyright act. Why do you think that a copyleft "condition" not to restrict users downstream should be treated any differently? The copyleft enforcement theory based on copyright-not-a-contract silliness is authoritatively dead under MDY precedent. Got it now, silly? regards, alexander. -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss