Sorry, but no

A word to the wise: khim is apparently of the opinion that since copyright lawyers disagree about the law, nobody's interpretation is any better than anyone else's; therefore, his uninformed ramblings are worth as much as anyone else's, too - and consequently he has every right to present them as fact and nobody else has any standing to challenge them. (I say "apparently" - as I understand it, this is precisely the position he laid out to me when I once challenged him about the eccentricity of one of his positions.)

Discussing copyright law with khim is like tic-tac-toe (or global thermonuclear war) - you can't win unless you don't play.