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

Re: Bug#317359: kde: ..3'rd "Help"->"About $KDE-app" tab calls the GPL "License Agreement", ie; a contract.

On Wed, Jul 13, 2005 at 08:49:42PM -0400, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> I think what he's saying is roughly: 1: if A has no license to distribute
> the software, puts it on a server, and B downloads it, why is B guilty of
> copyright infringement if it's A who lacked a license to distribute; or
> 2: why is B *not* guilty of copyright infringement if A has a license to
> distribute but B does not?"

I don't think it's been universally agreed upon whether B is infringing or
not.  Has anyone who has *only* downloaded music been convicted under federal
copyright laws?  I found an article[1] dated 3/7/05 about a man that was
convicted under a *state* law which prohibits "possession of counterfeit
marks, or unauthorized copies of intellectual property", and the article
claims that he is the first person in the country to be convicted just for


[1] http://www.usatoday.com/tech/news/techpolicy/2005-03-07-az-teen-downloader-convicted_x.htm

Reply to: