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

Re: Who can make binding legal agreements

"Martijn van Oosterhout" <kleptog@gmail.com> wrote in message [🔎] 2fc2c5f10606070302l1ce9231fn4e2421d6bf0f1bd7@mail.gmail.com">news:[🔎] 2fc2c5f10606070302l1ce9231fn4e2421d6bf0f1bd7@mail.gmail.com...
On 6/7/06, Thomas Bushnell BSG <tb@becket.net> wrote:
Russ Allbery <rra@debian.org> writes:
> John Goerzen <jgoerzen@complete.org> writes:
>> Sure. SPI owns many of the machines that Debian owns. If any of >> these
>> machines are being used to distribute this software, as I think is
>> likely, then SPI could be liable.
> Oh, very good point.  I hadn't thought of this.

No.  SPI is liable under the terms of copyright law; at most, it can
be told to stop distributing things.

Err, copyright infringement can be a criminal act as well. So if a DPP
(DA or whatever it's called in your jurisdiction) takes a dislike to
you (or perhaps someone whispers into their ear), they can haul you or
SPI or mirror operators into court without Sun having anything to say
about it. And the result could include gaol time, especially for this
sort of large-scale willing mass copyright infringement.

Except that In order to prove copyright violation the DA would need
to involve Sun. There is no way for the DA to know if Sun secretly
granted the infringer the right to distribute in that manner. AFAICT
the infringer need not even know about such a grant for it to be valid.


Reply to: