Re: perlfaq license
On Sun, May 24, 1998 at 07:10:45PM +0100, Edward Betts wrote:
>
> How about the GPL is that covered by the GPL? If so can people make their
> own modifications? Obviously this can not be allowed. That means all copies
> of the GPL must be moved to non-free.
I think that this discussion is quickly moving to non-sense.
Although I'm not a lawyer, I think that contracts, licenses as well as laws and
any "sentence which claims legal effect", once published, are covered by
different terms than those in the "copyright protection".
It's my opinion that those published contracts, licenses and laws are in some
sort of "public property" which forbits modifying any comma in them, but
permits derivations and reuse of everything in different new documents.
This is similar to the "copyright claime" in any copyrighted work. Even if you
grant all rights to modify and derive, the sencence claiming the copyright
cannot be changed in any way. This is because that sentence is not part of the
"work" in the sense of the "opera of art", but it's intead a contract bundled
with it.
AFAIK, contracts and laws aren't recursive.
fab - just my .02 euro
--
| fpolacco@icenet.fi fpolacco@debian.org fpolacco@pluto.linux.it
| 6F7267F5 fingerprint 57 16 C4 ED C9 86 40 7B 1A 69 A1 66 EC FB D2 5E
> support the open-source initiative! http://www.opensource.org/
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: