Re: GS Icon file Verifier released

[rder@pro-palmtree.cts.com (Richard Der)]

"Joshua M. Thompson" <invid@optera.com> wrote:
>David W. Young wrote:
>> I see. Intellectual property rights are only valid when backed up by
>> force. Although I think an Icon Verifier is the single most boring
>
>Your are putting words in my mouth, Mr. Young. What I'm trying to
>say is that there is a difference between restrictions meant to
>protect the author and restrictions meant to insult/annoy one specific
>individual. Exactly how would the inclusion of this verifier on a
>1WSW site cause the author harm?
 
 
Ok, I get what you are trying to say. You are saying (to clarify) that
under the current law, Nathan Mates CAN restrict the placing of said
software on the 1WSW. That much is NOT under dispute.
 
However, that said, you are saying that while this agrees with the
literal interpretation of the law, it does NOT agree with the SPIRIT
of the law when it was put into effect. This is a valid distinction
because (please correct if wrong) the courts have stepped in before
to modify laws when there is a challenge.
 
For example, the copyright law was once used to prevent copying of
software, period. Even though the law was originally INTENDED to guard
the copying of software BETWEEN parties, the software companies
tried to prevent people from even making backups. The courts stepped
and the law was ammended to allow backups, in accordance with the
spirit of the original law.
 
So what you are saying is that what Mr. Mates is doing is legal under
the current law but that the use of the law in such a manner is
contrary to its spirit. That said, we all obviously agree that he
can do this right now. Whether there will be a court challenge at
a later date remains to be seen.
 
An even more muddy case is what that ftp.asmiov.net site is doing.
That is a blatant violation of the copyright law that most will agree
is contrary to both the spirit AND the literal interpretation. Some
will argue that they are just trying to save dead software, but
have they tried to contact the copyright holders at all (like was
done in the "Lost Classics" project)?


-----
The Palmtree BBS  310-453-8726 v.32
Inet: rder@pro-palmtree.cts.com