Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 22:46:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 22:46:04 -0500 Received: from mail.webmaster.com ([216.152.64.131]:20901 "EHLO shell.webmaster.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id convert rfc822-to-8bit; Mon, 17 Mar 2003 22:46:03 -0500 From: David Schwartz To: , , X-Mailer: PocoMail 2.63 (1077) - Licensed Version Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 19:56:55 -0800 In-Reply-To: <200303170522.VAA03370@adam.yggdrasil.com> Subject: Re: Never ever send Pavel private mail unless you want him to publish Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT Illegal-Object: Syntax error in Message-ID: value found on vger.kernel.org: Message-ID: <20030318035644.AAA7175@shell.webmaster.com@whenever> ^-illegal end of message identification Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Message-Id: <20030318034604Z262149-25575+31757@vger.kernel.org> Content-Length: 1980 Lines: 50 On Sun, 16 Mar 2003 21:22:03 -0800, Adam J. Richter wrote: >| Under the aegis of the Moral Majority, Rev. Falwell?s conservative >| lobbying group, Falwell sent copies of the Hustler article, >together >| with a letter soliciting donations to help finance his lawsuit >against >| Hustler, to 29,000 of the organization?s major contributors. There >| was no question that Falwell had copied the entire Hustler article >but >| for ?eight of the most offensive words,? without any attempt to >| transform the original work.[30] Although the Ninth Circuit Court >of >| Appeals determined that copying the original to solicit funds for >| Falwell?s lawsuit was clearly commercial,[31] it still ruled >against >| Hustler stating that Defendant?s use ?could not have diminished any >| potential sales, interfered with the marketability of the parody or >| fulfilled the demand for the original work.?[32] The Moral >Majority?s >| members, the Court observed, would ?probably not be counted among >| Hustler?s readers,? and therefore the defendants, while profiting >from >| use of the copyrighted work, had not adversely affected the >| plaintiff?s market for it.[33] There are really only two conclusions you can draw from this: 1) This only applies to a situation where the primary purpose of the original publication is for the purposes of selling the item to produce revenue and therefore it's reasonable to judge the copyright violation on the basis of its affect on the sales of the original work, or 2) You can violate copyright for commercial purposes so long as you don't cost the original publisher anything. In which case, any GPL violation is acceptable, since there's no "market" for a free work. DS - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/