Dicta in a Bankruptcy Proceeding
In dicta, in ITOFCA v. MegaTrans, Judge Richard Posner states that "a copyright licensee has no right to make further copies (except a single, backup copy for his own use)." If I was the attorneys in the DVD-Xcopy, maybe I would bother to cite a 7th Circuit case even though that case deals with determining rights to a copyright following a bankruptcy proceeding.
This isn't surprising coming from Posner, who warned against an "enormous expansion" of intellectual-property law back in November. [via c|net]
Other tidbits that I gleaned from this case: "A copyright is neither a building nor cash" and "The copyright statute is explicit that there must be a memorandum in writing for the sale of copyright to be enforceable", but that agreement need not use the word copyright.
The moral of the case is: if you are drafting a contract that says all assets except a building and some cash then that means the copyright is included (on these facts anyway).
See also Ripple's Concurrence.
This isn't surprising coming from Posner, who warned against an "enormous expansion" of intellectual-property law back in November. [via c|net]
Other tidbits that I gleaned from this case: "A copyright is neither a building nor cash" and "The copyright statute is explicit that there must be a memorandum in writing for the sale of copyright to be enforceable", but that agreement need not use the word copyright.
The moral of the case is: if you are drafting a contract that says all assets except a building and some cash then that means the copyright is included (on these facts anyway).
See also Ripple's Concurrence.
