[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: libkrb53 - odd license term

On 2004-05-31 21:15:35 +0100 Glenn Maynard <g_deb@zewt.org> wrote:

The second paragraph is very questionable, even if the terms being "agreed
to" are free.

If the only way you can obtain it is by making a copy yourself, it is a little hostile but applicable, I guess. Surely it's not part of the actual licence?

"OpenVision also retains copyright to derivative works of the Source Code, whether created by OpenVision or by a third party" seems like it tries to
claim copyright in parts of derived works that they didn't create.

This smells bogus, but I believe it's accurate. The original author and the author of the derivative probably *both* have copyrights covering the new work. They do not try to deny a derivative's author copyright. This seems a description of law, hence null.

IANAL, but I try to listen to them carefully when at conferences they attend.

My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing
Help hack the EuroParl! http://mjr.towers.org.uk/proj/eurovote/

Reply to: