Re: PHPNuke license
On Mon, 2003-03-10 at 15:47, Walter Landry wrote:
> Don Armstrong <don@donarmstrong.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 10 Mar 2003, David Turner wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2003-03-07 at 00:19, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > >> Well, they try to anyway. If there's no copying taking place, I fail
> > >> to see how it can apply, whether it tries to or not.
> > >
> > > Because the preparation of derivative works is one of the exclusive
> > > rights of copyright holders. Please read 17 USC 106 (2) again.
> >
> > Yet again, it is not enough to cite 17 USC 106 (2), without citing 17
> > USC 107 and the caselaw based on 17 USC 107.
> >
> > Anthony is quite reasonable in presuming that the current
> > interpretation of "Fair Use" applies to cases where there is no
> > copying taking place. You are free to disagree, but merely citing 106
> > is not sufficient.
>
> In particular, I thought there was court precedent holding that it is
> ok for people using proprietary programs to swap patches with each
> other. It wouldn't make much sense to be able to swap patches if you
> couldn't apply them.
I would be surprised at this. Please give me a cite.
--
-Dave Turner Stalk Me: 617 441 0668
"On matters of style, swim with the current, on matters
of principle, stand like a rock." -Thomas Jefferson
Reply to: