Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > By definition a third party is a stranger to a contract. (“It goes > without saying that a contract cannot bind a nonparty.”) (EEOC V. > Waffle House, Inc., 534 U.S. 279, 294 (2002)). The contract term > that purports to control (without privity) the distribution rights > of all “all third parties to their own exclusive contributions in > derivative and collective works creates a “right against the world” > ? that is, in essence, a new copyright regulation. (“A copyright is > a right against the world. Contracts, by contrast, generally affect > only their parties; strangers may do as they please, so contracts do > not create "exclusive rights.") (ProCD Inc. v. Zeidenberg, 86 F.3d > 1447, 1454 (7th Cir. 1996)).
This alone is such a hilarious piece of nonsense. Any copyright license applies to all legal recipients of the licensed material. That is pretty much the whole point of licenses. This does not create "a new copyright regulation". -- 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
