[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy

From: Rjack
Subject: Re: Microsoft needs a help strategy
Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 19:42:08 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20081209)

Tim Smith wrote:
In article <4980a453$0$21838$>,
 "amicus_curious" <> wrote:
What is at issue today, though, is the nature of such "default copyright rules". If there is no fee charged to use the work or to redistribute the work, the copyright can be ignored unless the author can show some degree of harm to himself.

Where did you get that idea? Not from the copyright statute, nor from the case law.

Actually the GPL requires licensing and distribution of the source code to "all third parties" and no benefit (consideration) is intended for either contracting party (parties in privity) to the GPL agreement (try reading the GPL sometime).

Under US law only a member of the class "all third parties" have a right to claim a benefit from the GPL. The owners (parties in privity) of the copyrighted code which the GPL covers have no standing to file suit because some member of the class "all third parties" doesn't receive his promised source code.

As the US Supreme Court clearly stated:

"Standing doctrine embraces several judicially self-imposed limits on the exercise of federal jurisdiction, such as the general prohibition on a litigant's raising another person's legal rights, . . ."; ALLEN v. WRIGHT 468 U.S. 737, 751 (1984)

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]