3 ms·
Why not argue that because the external contractors in china are using an illegal copy, therefore there is no client that paid a license to use the software, an
by braum 10y ago
Why not argue that because the external contractors in china are using an illegal copy, therefore there is no client that paid a license to use the software, and that DDC (software maker) should be able to assume the copyright of the output because they are the only viable and legal copyright holder of the software in use. AND therefore the only one with a valid license of the software and its output.
- crooked-v 10y ago> A. DDC (software maker) should be able to assume the copyright of the output > B. they are the only viable and legal copyright holder of the software in use B does not imply A. You're trying to invent something here that doesn't exist.
- macmac 10y agoOne of the judges actually start by disabusing DDC's counsel of the notion that one has anything to do with the other. You don't get to invent a new legal concept just because someone allegedly pirated your software.
- Rzah 10y agoIf I steal a pen and write a poem with it I still hold copyright over the poem, how the poem was transcribed has no bearing on copyright.
- braum 10y agogreat analogy, thanks!