Subject: Re: BREAKING NEWS - "Offending Code" Specified (LinuxWorld)(Printview)
To: William Allen Simpson <email@example.com>
From: Frederick Bruckman <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 12/24/2003 06:31:12
On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, William Allen Simpson wrote:
> As a followup, I just don't see the DMCA "copyright management
> information" claim, but I'm sure the lawyers will argue, somehow.
> This information is never "conveyed" in a binary interface.
It's plainer than that. Even if you could copyright an ABI -- you
can't -- SCO's claim is that all readers are obligated to read their
mind, and also to comply with the directive read from their mind,
simply by virtue of it being their wish, absent any legal basis to
force compliance. As matter of fact, it's not even their own
collective mind that they assert so confidently, but the collective
mind of another organization from which they purchased the rights.
SCO's claims are so outrageous, one can only wonder what they're
really up to.
Interestingly, they invoke the DMCA, as if the plum of a 100-year
copyright is so much juicier than a mere patent or license, that
they'll say or risk anything to get it.