David Kastrup wrote: > > Alexander Terekhov <terek...@web.de> writes: > > > David Kastrup wrote: > > [...] > >> > A compilation work which you call 'MacOSX' is a collective work (see > >> > 17 USC 101 for both 'compilation' and 'collective work') of Apple and > >> > only Apple, silly. > >> > >> Without any components with copyright by other parties? > > > > The copyright on components (distinct from the compilation work) is > > totally separate/independent copyright (distinct from the copyright on > > compilation) you retard dak. > > So for any component with copyrighted parts from other parties (like > BSD), Apple could not sue for breach of copyright without having the > other parties joining the suit? > > Reality check...
Apple's COMPILATION WORK is NOT A JOINT WORK you retard. Apple took some BSD'd works and included that stuff in a compilation work exclusively (C) by Apple and only Apple. It's not a joint work under 17 USC 101. regards, alexander. -- http://gng.z505.com/index.htm (GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards too, whereas GNU cannot.) _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss