Rui Miguel Seabra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Tue, 2005-04-12 at 14:18 +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote: >> Rui Miguel Seabra wrote: >> [...] >> > Because those that have somewhat more insight, see that your >> > arguments do not apply, because you're talking of a radically >> > different concept (first sale doctrine) than (re)distribution as >> > if they where the exact same thing. >> >> They may well be radically different concepts under GNU Copyright >> Law (I know that you have much more insight regarding it than me). > > What happens to ONE copy, wheter it is in your hands alone, or if > you gave THAT copy to someone else, that's first sale.
Correction: if there is an exchange of interests. You can't claim first sale rights without a benefit for the "seller". The redistribution of explicit _promotional_ material or stuff that is part of a support of other products for which you have commercial interests would probably count as such. But as long as the benefits of the transaction are completely one-sided, there are no rights transferred. >> As for US CODE: Title 17, "(re)distribution" is nonexistent and >> "first sale" limitation on exclusive distribution right is quite >> real. > > But you can't MAKE COPIES of YOUR copy and (re)DISTRIBUTE them > unless you have distribution rights. This is plain default > copyright law. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list Gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
