it had to reach an agreement with Gener to that effect. Such agreement transferring the copyright and distribution rights to Adcom is absent in this case pursuant to the parties own admission. Thus, the first sale would be no defense to the unlawful reproductions. Absent that agreement, Adcom can only sell each of the more than 400 individual tangible photographs which it owns to whomever it wants, without violating the copyright which Gener may hold in that photograph. What Adcom nor anyone else can do, in the absence of an agreement, under section 109(a) and its exceptions, is make or distribute copies of those photographs, much less make unlimited reproductions or alterations of them in weekly shoppers. See Columbia Pictures Industries, Inc. v. Aveco, Inc., 800 F.2d 59 (3d Cir.1986) (<HOLDING>). Gener has called to our attention to the many
holding the rights protected by copyright are divisible and the waiver of one does not necessarily waives the others holding that while the computer program at issue was within the subject matter of copyright the right sought under state law pursuant to a license was not equivalent to the exclusive rights under copyright as such copyright preemption did not apply holding that the failure to sign a miranda form in full does not necessarily invalidate the waiver holding that the two elements of a copyright infringement claim are 1 the plaintiff owns a valid copyright right and 2 the defendants copied constituent elements of the work that are original holding that a plea agreement with a waiver of direct appeal rights does not include a waiver of collateral remedies because the government could have included a waiver of collateral rights in the plea agreement and chose not to do so