Contract or License?

SamBC sambc at
Sun Sep 16 15:52:37 UTC 2001

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Rod Dixon [mailto:rodd at]
> Sent: 14 September 2001 23:20
> Mai v. Peak case is still good law. Today, a copyright holder may control
> the RAM copy of a software copyright-protected work. The fact that a
> copyright holder can control his or her work at the level of a RAM copy
> may be big trouble for us. Ostensibly, one can hardly "use' software
> without the author's permission, if he or she can control copying at the
> point of a RAM copy. This practicial consideration, I believe, is
> Karsten's point. Indeed, section 117 of the Copyright Act is a limitation
> - - a limitation that is quite limited - - on this RAM right (no pun
> intended).

Just to clear a point up - are we making the usual image error of most
movies, i.e. USA = World?

DMCA surely holds no water (or has any effect) overseas? For example, we in
the EU (UK in my case), who have always had greater freedoms in regards to
copyright & related laws, and their potential overuse in the case of
software (such as software patents), are surely in no way affected, even
when the software originates in the US? The same is presumably true of
UCITA, whatever happened to it in the end...

So, Microsoft and their cronies (and competitors) can license based on these
US laws all they want, but they still have a disclaimer along the lines of
the following in every license:

"Some of the terms and limitations may not be valid in your jurisdiction,
and therefore do not apply to you"

The point of this email is to ask: is this list entirely USA-centred, or is
it supposed to apply to whatever extent possible internationally?

Sam Barnett-Cormack
Software Developer
UK Mirror Service (

If there is no solution, there is no problem...

license-discuss archive is at

More information about the License-discuss mailing list