Re: Some licensing questions regarding celestia
Quoting Don Armstrong (email@example.com):
> 17 USC 106 (3) lists four ways for a copy to be distributed. [...]
If you think 17 USC limits the means of distribution of a copyrighted
work's instance to only four, and somehow precludes for software
anything other that sale or lease, then I think you have an extremely
_Obviously_ the Copyright Act in no wise addresses, let alone restricts,
the ways in which works may be distributed. Be serious.
> In such a case, the licensor has no more rights than granted to him by
> copyright law.
> If there is no privity, there can be no contract, therefore the
> rights granted are granted by statute.
That is a non-sequitur, and you are begging the question: Open-source
licences such as GPLv2 and the BSD licence are _founded_ in the
assumption that licensors may grant rights above and beyond the
statutory ones, with attached conditions.
> Perhaps I'm missing some key point, but I don't see how we can use
> such software save under a valid license or leasing agreement persuant
> to section 106 (3) and following the legal forms of a lease.
Yes, you are indeed missing a key point.
Sorry, but this has become tedious.
Cheers, kill -9 them all.
Rick Moen Let init sort it out.