[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [dvd-discuss] Interesting 1st sale-shrinkwrap-EULA-(c)infringementcase
- To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Subject: Re: [dvd-discuss] Interesting 1st sale-shrinkwrap-EULA-(c)infringementcase
- From: Noah silva <nsilva(at)atari-source.com>
- Date: Fri, 2 Nov 2001 09:57:49 -0500 (EST)
- In-Reply-To: <20011102014455.16820.qmail@web13904.mail.yahoo.com>
- Reply-To: dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
- Sender: owner-dvd-discuss(at)cyber.law.harvard.edu
So let me be stupid here and ask... What happens when someone who wants
to do something against (GPL, BSD Lisence, MPL, SISSL, LGPL, etc.) claims
he isn't bound by the lisence because he has "first sale" (or first
gift?).
-- noah silva
On Thu, 1 Nov 2001, Bryan Taylor wrote:
>
> --- Michael.A.Rolenz@aero.org wrote:
> > This one is just full of good material....
>
> http://www.cacd.uscourts.gov/CACD/RecentPubOp.nsf/bb61c530eab0911c882567cf005ac6f9/574aa79ff518021188256aed006ea2dc/$FILE/CV00-04161DDP.pdf
>
> I've just been reading it carefully. This case does rocks. Virtually every page
> is a rejection of the licenced, not sold tripe.
>
> I especially like it when it discusses the One Stop and Harmony decisions (the
> latter is the origin of the licenced, not sold idea) and just leaves it with
> "The Court declines to adopt the analysis of these cases."
>
>
> __________________________________________________
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Find a job, post your resume.
> http://careers.yahoo.com
>