In article <[email protected]>,
 Hyman Rosen <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> <http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=fedclaim&vol=1999/9747
> 6c>
>      Thus, nonexclusive licenses are explicitly removed from the 204(a)
>      writing requirement.
>      ...
>      Under federal law, nonexclusive copyright licenses can be granted orally
>      or implied from conduct.
>      ...
>      The existence of either an exclusive or nonexclusive license creates an
>      affirmative defense to a claim of copyright infringement.

205(e) is the problematical section, not 204(a).

-- 
--Tim Smith
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss

Reply via email to