[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled
From: |
Hyman Rosen |
Subject: |
Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled |
Date: |
Mon, 22 Feb 2010 16:43:59 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.9.1.5) Gecko/20091204 Thunderbird/3.0 |
On 2/22/2010 4:33 PM, RJack wrote:
the entirely unremarkable principle
that “uses” that violate a license agreement constitute copyright
infringement only when those uses would infringe in the absence of any
license agreement at all
Yes. And the use here is copying and distribution, which
infringes in the absence of any license agreement at all.
(ND CA)
Of what use is it to quote a district court ruling that
was overturned on appeal?
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, (continued)
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Alan Mackenzie, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Alan Mackenzie, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, David Kastrup, 2010/02/23
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Alan Mackenzie, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled,
Hyman Rosen <=
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Alan Mackenzie, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22