|FROM ||Rick Moen
|SUBJECT ||Re: [Hangout of NYLXS] Fair USe
|From hangout-bounces-at-nylxs.com Fri May 19 01:38:34 2017
Received: from www.mrbrklyn.com (www.mrbrklyn.com [188.8.131.52])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC5E1161312;
Fri, 19 May 2017 01:38:32 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from linuxmafia.com (linuxmafia.COM [184.108.40.206])
by mrbrklyn.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6FF43160E77
for ; Fri, 19 May 2017 01:38:16 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from rick by linuxmafia.com with local (Exim 4.72)
(envelope-from ) id 1dBacB-0003eA-3T
for hangout-at-nylxs.com; Thu, 18 May 2017 22:38:15 -0700
Date: Thu, 18 May 2017 22:38:15 -0700
From: Rick Moen
Organization: If you lived here, you'd be $HOME already.
X-Mas: Bah humbug.
X-Clacks-Overhead: GNU Terry Pratchett
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-SA-Exim-Scanned: No (on linuxmafia.com); SAEximRunCond expanded to false
Subject: Re: [Hangout of NYLXS] Fair USe
List-Id: NYLXS Tech Talk and Politics
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Quoting Ruben Safir (ruben-at-mrbrklyn.com):
> I don't need to study case law.
Then, you have opted out of meaningful discussion. Ever. Thanks for
> That is my opinion.
You lack the understanding to hold an informed opinion. But of course
you have an _opinion_. The problem is that's typically just about all
> As the EFF wrote:
One cannot understand what EFF wrote, and understand that they
grealy oversimplified in claiming the case is about 'copyrighting
APIs', when in fact it's about whether copyrightable elements exist in
37 'API' programs that were copied either literally or non-literally,
without a basic understanding of the subject. Which you refuse to get.
Which leaves you with your opinons. Good luck with that.
The uncredited EFF staffer failed to mention that the Circuit Court's
holding is nothing new at all, by the way.
Anyway, it's really comical for you to say 'As the EFF wrote' as if you
were filing a learned concurring opinion when you don't even understand
the basic law on this matter. But then, that's pretty much your entire
shtick. You quote someone else's entire articles on subjects like
copyright law and free use -- hilariously, always in violation of the
authors' copyrights -- without actually understanding their subjects,
and then append an editorial.
As my old slogan goes, 'It's easier than thinking!'
> What is needed is legistlative change....
Which you support by voting for plutocrats. I see.
Hangout mailing list