Re: Conde Nast vs. Blackmask (copyright infringement)

The predicate:

>See, there's this common law tradition of Adverse Possession

Yeah, right. That's what sec. 301 is for.

John Noble

At 12:00 PM -0400 4/11/06, Jon Noring wrote:
>Most here may have already seen this, but for the few who haven't,
>appears to be a very interesting copyright infrinement case:
>
>For the details and links elsewhere, see:
>
> http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=4631
>
>with a small update at:
>
> http://www.teleread.org/blog/?p=4639
>
>
>Lots of interesting aspects to this case, particulary with regards to
>the Public Domain.
>
>Jon Noring
>
>
>#############################################################
>This message is sent to you because you are subscribed to
> the mailing list <CNI-COPYRIGHT[_at_]cni.org>.
>To unsubscribe, E-mail to: <CNI-COPYRIGHT-off[_at_]cni.org>
>To switch to the DIGEST mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-digest[_at_]cni.org>
>To switch to the INDEX mode, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-index[_at_]cni.org>
>To postpone your subscription, E-mail to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-null[_at_]cni.org>
>To resume mail list message delivery from postpone mode, E-mail to
><CNI-COPYRIGHT-feed[_at_]cni.org>
>Send administrative queries to <CNI-COPYRIGHT-request[_at_]cni.org>
>
>Visit the CNI-COPYRIGHT e-mail list archive at
><https://mail2.cni.org/Lists/CNI-COPYRIGHT/>.
Received on Wed Apr 12 2006 - 00:00:01 GMT