Re: Is the GPL all encompassing?

[amicus_curious]

"Rjack" <user@example.net> wrote in message 
tsmdneIs5NEH9UjVnZ2dnUVZ_sjinZ2d@giganews.com">news:tsmdneIs5NEH9UjVnZ2dnUVZ_sjinZ2d@giganews.com...
> amicus_curious wrote:
> > "Rjack" <user@example.net> wrote in message 
> > 04CdnTQPD_EVtEjVnZ2dnUVZ_tLinZ2d@giganews.com">news:04CdnTQPD_EVtEjVnZ2dnUVZ_tLinZ2d@giganews.com...
> > > > Assume I have the source code for the Linux 2.6 kernel.
> > > > Suppose I want to use just a piece of it. How small a piece
> > > > does it have to be before I'm no longer violating the GPL?
>
> > So do you want to "steal" this code and go into business armed
> > only with a clone of a clone?
>
> So do you want to "steal" code to achieve your socialist dreams?
> GPL authors obviously want to "steal" other author's exclusive
> rights by intimidation [n.1] with a copyright license that is
> clearly an illegal misuse of copyright.
I think that you misread my comment.  My belief is that the GPL is totally 
unnecessary because what it seeks to prevent isn't a viable outcome to 
beging with.  I put the word "steal" in comments with the expectation that 
it meant that I did not consider it to be theft to begin with.

> I find it incredible that after listening to seven years of pure
> legal gibberish from Eben "a license is not a contract" Moglen, you
> still spout crap such as: "So do you want to "steal" this code. .
> .". It seems that your ignorance of the law is exceeded only by your
> gullibility:
Well, I admit to having a lot of ignorance of the law and frequent these 
forums to improve on that score.  One of the premises of copyright is that 
you only copyright the expression of the idea and not the idea itself.  If 
the idea cannot be protected by patent, anyone is free to clone the idea. 
Your original question was in regard to how much of a copy can be considered 
legitimate. I think that, given the fairly restrictive range of computer 
code's ability to express the idea, there is not much beyond a 100% verbatim 
copy that would qualify as copyright infringement.  If you have the source, 
you have the essential idea only and the nature of the developer is to put 
his own mark on the code anyway, so any such code will be massaged into a 
quite different expression from the original.  That is where all the fun is 
and it is unlikely that anyone but a true drudge would verbatim copy source 
code.

> "Although the United States Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C.  101-
> 1332, grants exclusive jurisdiction for infringement claims to the
> federal courts, those courts construe copyrights as contracts and
> turn to the relevant state law to interpret them."; Automation by
> Design, Inc. v. Raybestos Products Co., 463 F.3d 749, (United
> States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit 2006).
Tell that to the RIAA.