The US is a republic based on laws, not the current popular opinion (mob rule). It goes back to the old analogy of two wolves and a sheep voting for what to have for dinner. In a pure democracy, the sheep would be dinner. In a republic, it would be illegal to eat the sheep and the sheep would be armed. That's why the founding fathers made the US a republic; they feared mob rule.
If popular opinion rule, we would still have slavery, Jim Crow Laws and the civil rights movement would have been for nothing.
The document already mentions Monty Python several times:
In the landmark case of Gilliam v. ABC, the Second Circuit directed the district court to issue a preliminary injunction preventing ABC from broadcasting edited versions of three comedy skits written and performed by the British comedy group Monty Python. 538 F.2d at 17, 26. Stressing "the need to allow the proprietor of the underlying copyright to control the method in which his work is presented to the public," the court stated that "unauthorized editing of the underlying work, if proven, would constitute an infringement of the copyright in that work similar to any other use of a work that exceeded the license granted by the proprietor of the copyright." Id. at 21. The court thus concluded that "there is a substantial likelihood that, after a full trial, appellants will succeed in proving infringement of their copyright by ABC's broadcast of edited versions of Monty Python programs." Id. at 23. As a leading copyright treatise later noted, Gilliam was the first case to hold that unauthorized changes in a copyrighted work constitute infringement. See 3 Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer on Copyright 8D.04[A][1], at 8D-49 (1999) ("Although the statement could be found in certain early decisions that an author has the right to prevent distortion or truncation of his work, this right matured to full copyright status in the landmark case of Gilliam v. American Broadcasting Companies.") (footnotes omitted).
As the above cases demonstrate, however, even if Microsoft's OEM license agreements did not include such provisions, OEMs¾ as licensees of Microsoft's copyrighted operating system software¾ could not modify Windows without Microsoft's permission. This is not to say, of course, that the "copyright protection Microsoft enjoys in its software is . . . unlimited." Microsoft, 1998 WL 614485, at *15. Rather, just as the copyright laws gave Monty Python the right to prevent ABC from broadcasting edited version of Monty Python's comedy skits without its permission, see 538 F.2d at 17, the copyright laws likewise give Microsoft the right to prevent OEMs, which act as Microsoft's distributors, from shipping modified versions of Windows without Microsoft's permission.
Slashdot Mirror
Or the US Government requiring all new PCs use MS Windows and MS Office.
M$ wouldn't have got our of control without the help of the government.
If popular opinion rule, we would still have slavery, Jim Crow Laws and the civil rights movement would have been for nothing.
In the landmark case of Gilliam v. ABC, the Second Circuit directed the district court to issue a preliminary injunction preventing ABC from broadcasting edited versions of three comedy skits written and performed by the British comedy group Monty Python. 538 F.2d at 17, 26. Stressing "the need to allow the proprietor of the underlying copyright to control the method in which his work is presented to the public," the court stated that "unauthorized editing of the underlying work, if proven, would constitute an infringement of the copyright in that work similar to any other use of a work that exceeded the license granted by the proprietor of the copyright." Id. at 21. The court thus concluded that "there is a substantial likelihood that, after a full trial, appellants will succeed in proving infringement of their copyright by ABC's broadcast of edited versions of Monty Python programs." Id. at 23. As a leading copyright treatise later noted, Gilliam was the first case to hold that unauthorized changes in a copyrighted work constitute infringement. See 3 Melville B. Nimmer & David Nimmer, Nimmer on Copyright 8D.04[A][1], at 8D-49 (1999) ("Although the statement could be found in certain early decisions that an author has the right to prevent distortion or truncation of his work, this right matured to full copyright status in the landmark case of Gilliam v. American Broadcasting Companies.") (footnotes omitted).
As the above cases demonstrate, however, even if Microsoft's OEM license agreements did not include such provisions, OEMs¾ as licensees of Microsoft's copyrighted operating system software¾ could not modify Windows without Microsoft's permission. This is not to say, of course, that the "copyright protection Microsoft enjoys in its software is . . . unlimited." Microsoft, 1998 WL 614485, at *15. Rather, just as the copyright laws gave Monty Python the right to prevent ABC from broadcasting edited version of Monty Python's comedy skits without its permission, see 538 F.2d at 17, the copyright laws likewise give Microsoft the right to prevent OEMs, which act as Microsoft's distributors, from shipping modified versions of Windows without Microsoft's permission.