On Mon, 08 Oct 2012 15:45:24 +0200, Alexander Terekhov wrote... > > Tim Jackson wrote: > [...] > > (Hint: Differences include the fact that one uses the term "lawfully > > made" while the other doesn't. Similarities include the fact that both > > relate only to the sale or transfer or other disposal of "that copy". > > Not to the creation of new copies from it.) > > Uhh, silly Jackson... again: creation of new copies in the case of GCC > is perfectly fine and unrestricted thanks to the GPL's reproduction > permission.
But that still doesn't support your argument. I've had enough of explaining why. Goodbye. > > As for the rest, go send a patch to wikipedia... <chuckles> > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright#The_first-sale_doctrine_and_exhaustion_of_rights > > "The first-sale doctrine and exhaustion of rights > > Main articles: First-sale doctrine and Exhaustion of rights > > Copyright law does not restrict the owner of a copy from reselling > legitimately obtained copies of copyrighted works, provided that those > copies were originally produced by or with the permission of the > copyright holder. It is therefore legal, for example, to resell a > copyrighted book or CD. " And this doesn't support your argument either. Again, I've had enough of explaining why. Goodbye. -- Tim Jackson news@timjackson.invalid (Change '.invalid' to '.plus.com' to reply direct) _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
