On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 16:27:10 +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote... > > Tim Jackson wrote: > [...] > > But that still doesn't support your argument. I've had enough of > > explaining why. Goodbye. > > A perfectly legitimate copy (as of time of reproduction) just can't > somehow become infringing by subsequent act of distribution of THAT copy > under terms and conditions that you don't like, silly. That's what > "first sale" / exhaustion is about.
But even that **still** doesn't support your argument. > (The idea is that copyright owner > can "sell" copies (material objects) made by him and/or permissions to > reproduce by others and don't mess with secondary markets with respect > to copies made and distributed by him and/or made with his permission > and owned by others.) And this is just wrong. I've had enough of explaining why. Goodbye. -- Tim Jackson news@timjackson.invalid (Change '.invalid' to '.plus.com' to reply direct) _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
