Re: GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code
On 5/11/05, Raul Miller <moth.debian@gmail.com> wrote:
> The GPL does not grant the right to sublicense.
>
> Section 6's grant does not depend on an agent having a valid
> license.
Horse, pulp, etc. I'll even point you at a message where I made the
case that sublicense isn't workable:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2005/01/msg00746.html . Ask a
court.
> Here, you're assuming that the section 6 GPL license grants
> are not license grants but something else.
What happens to an offer of contract when the offeror is dead? How
about you dig for relevant case law for a change?
Cheers,
- Michael
Reply to:
- References:
- 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>
- Re: GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code
- From: Raul Miller <moth.debian@gmail.com>