Re: GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code
On 5/11/05, Michael K. Edwards <m.k.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/11/05, Raul Miller <moth.debian@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 5/11/05, Michael K. Edwards <m.k.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On the other hand, the termination is not for 35 years after the grant.
> > And, in the case of the GPL, everyone gets an independent grant:
> >
> > Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on
> > the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license
> > from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the
> > Program subject to these terms and conditions.
> >
> > This might not be as effective as a "work made for hire" for a shell
> > corporation, but I wouldn't want to bet that these license grants are
> > ineffective, either.
>
> That's actually one of the subtler reductio ad absurdum arguments
> against construing this clause as independent offers of contract from
> each copyright holder. The actual, historical law to the rescue
> again! I (IANAL) would expect a court to construe this as a grant of
> agency to sublicense under the GPL's terms.
The GPL does not grant the right to sublicense.
Section 6's grant does not depend on an agent having a valid
license.
> > Also, if a currently valid work is being actively maintained,
> > it's possible that an original author who is dead for 35 years
> > will no longer own a majority of the work.
>
> Which is completely irrelevant. Any degree of derivation which is not
> "de minimis" under the Computer Associates v. Altai
> abstraction-filtration-comparison test, or its equivalent in the
> appropriate jurisdiction, gets a complainant past the "copying"
> threshold and on to an evaluation of licensing status and other
> affirmative defenses. And it's not "dead for 35 years" -- it's "35
> years from hypothecation".
Here, you're assuming that the section 6 GPL license grants
are not license grants but something else.
--
Raul
Reply to:
- References:
- Re: GPL and linking
- From: "Michael K. Edwards" <m.k.edwards@gmail.com>
- Re: GPL and linking
- From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
- GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code
- From: "Michael K. Edwards" <m.k.edwards@gmail.com>
- Re: GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code
- From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
- Re: GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code
- From: "Michael K. Edwards" <m.k.edwards@gmail.com>
- Re: GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code
- From: Glenn Maynard <glenn@zewt.org>
- Re: GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code
- From: "Michael K. Edwards" <m.k.edwards@gmail.com>
- Re: GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code
- From: Raul Miller <moth.debian@gmail.com>
- Re: GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code
- From: "Michael K. Edwards" <m.k.edwards@gmail.com>