Oh, my experience comes from spending thousands of dollars on lawyers
while pursuing a copyright infringement case where a client stole the
code, lock, stock and barrel. When one spends months in daily contact
with lawyers one tends to get a good education on the subject matter
I just wrote out a long explanation of the law but I decided to delete
it. This issue isn't about copyright infringement, a straw horse, and
I'm not going to divert off in that direction. The issues remain a)
what, if any, value attaching a name to code has and b) what amount of
ego is involved.
OK, you can go back to playing internet.lawyer now.
On Fri, 10 Mar 2006 01:17:15 -0500, "Michael E. DiFebbo"
>Neon John wrote:
>> But I repeat, this is all an irrelevant tempest in a teapot since the
>> ONLY thing the maintainers will ever have to do in the even there is
>> infringement is remove the infringing code. Period.
>I've been trying to stay out of this pointless discussion but I can't
>let this go by. John, what is your basis for this statement? Are you
>aware that section 504(c)(2) of the United States Copyright Act allows
>statutory damages of up to $150,000 for willful copyright infringement,
>and statutory damages of $750 to $30,000 for non-willful copyright
>(my real name)
John De Armond
See my website for my current email address
Cleveland, Occupied TN
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds.-Ralph Waldo Emerson
Received on Fri Mar 10 18:10:23 2006