Re: Syndicomm processing update

["Peter Watson" <paw77@N_O_hotmail_S_P_A_M.com>]

"Linards Ticmanis" <ticmanis@gmx.de> wrote in message 
news:47f28cfc$0$640$9b4e6d93@newsspool1.arcor-online.net...
> Peter Watson wrote:
>
>> I used to think that way myself until someone explained that (from their 
>> point of view) companies *have* to defend *every* instance of copyright 
>> and license infringement. The moment they don't, it becomes a precedent 
>> and makes it that much harder for them to successfully take action again 
>> in the future.
>
> Isn't that only the case with trademark infringement? Are you sure they 
> were talking about copyright?

Certainly the most commonly seen example is trademark infringement, but as I 
understand it (which means I could be completely wrong!) it's a little more 
generic than that. The issue here is not really copyright (although that may 
well be the underlying law) but licenses and contracts.

Sheppy has a license to print manuals. If he he "virtually" prints them (via 
download) and Apple does nothing about it because it's only for the Apple 
II, then they may well have problems arguing in court against something 
similar for the Mac or iPod.

In the end, the legal profession is extremely conservative. They'll err on 
the side of "just in case" every time!
-- 
Peter Watson
-- Write to MS-DOS disks on the Apple IIgs?
-- Impossible!  ;-)