[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT
From: |
Tim Smith |
Subject: |
Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT |
Date: |
Sun, 14 Sep 2008 05:02:01 -0700 |
User-agent: |
MT-NewsWatcher/3.5.3b2 (Intel Mac OS X) |
In article <gaifg9$dj7$1@blue.rahul.net>,
c.c.eiftj@XReXXsoftw.usenet.us.com (Rahul Dhesi) wrote:
> Tim Smith <reply_in_group@mouse-potato.com> writes:
>
> >The JMRI case is completely irrelevant to the BusyBox cases, because the
> >JMRI copyrights are all registered. They readily show up if you search
> >the copyright registration database. Not so for the BusyBox copyrights.
>
> I think the essential holding in the CAFC's opinion on the JMRI case
> would apply to non-US non-registered works too.
Of course. BusyBox, however, appears to be a US non-registered work,
not a non-us non-registered work.
(BTW, note that even for non-US works, registering makes extra remedies
available beyond the requirements of Berne, and registration is cheap.
Thus, we'd expect that even if someone were suing over a non-US work,
they would register before filing suit, to take advantage of the extra
remedies. Thus, it is very puzzling to ever see a copyright suit filed
in the US over a work that is not registered).
--
--Tim Smith
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, (continued)
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Alexander Terekhov, 2008/09/12
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/12
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Alexander Terekhov, 2008/09/12
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/12
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Alexander Terekhov, 2008/09/12
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Hyman Rosen, 2008/09/12
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Rjack, 2008/09/12
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, chrisv, 2008/09/13
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Tim Smith, 2008/09/13
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Rahul Dhesi, 2008/09/14
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT,
Tim Smith <=
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Rahul Dhesi, 2008/09/14
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Tim Smith, 2008/09/14
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Rahul Dhesi, 2008/09/14
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Ben Pfaff, 2008/09/14
- Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Tim Smith, 2008/09/15
Re: softwarefreedom.org and busybox fellows 'win' DEFAULT JUDGMENT, Rahul Dhesi, 2008/09/13