From: "David Schwartz" <davids@webmaster.com>
To: "Willy Tarreau" <willy@w.ods.org>
Cc: <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>, <okuji@gnu.org>
Subject: RE: possible GPL violation by Free
Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 19:06:22 -0700
Message-ID: <MDEHLPKNGKAHNMBLJOLKAEFIOOAA.davids@webmaster.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <1097456379.27877.51.camel@frenchenigma>
Importance: Normal
Reply-To: davids@webmaster.com
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1203
Lines: 28


> If I remember correctly my contract, after 36 months, I become the owner
> of the freebox. The argument about renting does not seem to hold,
> anyway.

	In the United States, it is illegal to rent computer software without the
copyright holder's permission. Arguments such as, "I'm selling/renting the
computer/hard drive, the software just happens to be on it" don't generally
impress the courts.

	In any event, it seems pretty obvious to me that renting a physical medium
that contains an encoded copyrighted work is a form of distribution of that
work. The operation of that physical device is as much a derived work of the
copyrighted work as the visual/audio experience of seeing a play is a
derived work of the script for the play.

	In other words, I don't think any court or lawyer would find the "we're
renting the computer, not distributing the software that comes with it and
is required for its operation" to be persuasive. IANL, YMMV.

	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/