[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
MDY v. BLIZZARD
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
MDY v. BLIZZARD |
Date: |
Tue, 21 Dec 2010 14:29:19 +0100 |
http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/opinions/view_subpage.php?pk_id=0000011049
(Opinion for: MDY INDUSTRIES, LLC V. BLIZZARD ENTERTAINMENT, INC.,
09-15932)
The question of copy ownership aside, the court rejected the
copyright claim and held:
"Were we to hold otherwise, Blizzard or any software copyright
holder could designate any disfavored conduct during software
use as copyright infringement, by purporting to condition the
license on the player's abstention from the disfavored conduct.
The rationale would be that because the conduct occurs while
the player's computer is copying the software code into RAM in
order for it to run, the violation is copyright infringement.
This would allow software copyright owners far greater rights
than Congress has generally conferred on copyright owners."
It seems the court here ruled that certain requirements in a
software license may be construed as "covenants" rather than
"conditions" (or license scope limitations like e.g. a limit
on number of copies to be made). In other words, the WoW
license may say, in a nutshell, "We license you the right to
use this software so long as you don't use a bot." (Among other
things). The court considered that a "covenant" of a contract,
not a "condition" of the license (and not a license scope
limitation). What impact could that reasoning have on the
copyleft-like licenses? The copyleft basically says, "We
license you the right to distribute verbatim or modified
versions of this software so long as you provide source code."
Could a court following the MDY precedent construe the
"source code" requirement as a "covenant" and not a
"condition", thereby rendering the copyleft ineffective? I
see no reason why not...
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.)
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), (continued)
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), David Kastrup, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), RJack, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernorscandalous ruling), Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), David Kastrup, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/08
- Re: Utterly imbecile pinky communist Ninth Circuit 'judges' (Vernor scandalous ruling), Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- MDY v. BLIZZARD,
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: MDY v. BLIZZARD, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourt of Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourt of Appeals, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Hyman Rosen, 2010/12/21
- Re: Jacobsen v Katzer, 535 F.3d 1373 overruled by the US Ninth CircuitCourtof Appeals, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/12/21