On Thursday 14 July 2005 09:46 am, Adam McKenna wrote: > On Thu, Jul 14, 2005 at 09:38:25AM -0700, Sean Kellogg wrote: > > But I'm not talking about USE, I'm talking about the possession of a copy > > of the code. You are not permitted to have a copy of the code without > > permission under the law. Period, end of story, except no substitutions. > > Please cite the part of copyright law that says this.
(s)106(1) - "(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;" Yes, I am aware that if you spontaneously HAVE a copy that its not infringement, it is the ACT of copying that is infringing. And no, I'm not interested in those cases. I am interested in cases where people are running apt-get and COPYING the code from the archives to their personal machines. As an aside, there is no such thing as having a copy unless there was, at some time, copying. So the operative question is who is doing the copying and are they authorized to do so. -Sean -- Sean Kellogg 3rd Year - University of Washington School of Law Graduate & Professional Student Senate Treasurer UW Service & Activities Committee Interim Chair w: http://probonogeek.blogspot.com So, let go ...Jump in ...Oh well, what you waiting for? ...it's all right ...'Cause there's beauty in the breakdown