Re: Contracts and licenses
- To: debian-legal@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Contracts and licenses
- From: Nathanael Nerode <neroden@twcny.rr.com>
- Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 03:08:50 -0400
- Message-id: <[🔎] cctde2$53g$1@sea.gmane.org>
- References: <bVy7OD.A.be._xX4AB@murphy> <40E1826C.90801@almg.gov.br> <87ekny5lxz.fsf@aule.evenmere.org> <20040629183907.GB92129@stack.nl> <87vfha41kz.fsf@aule.evenmere.org> <20040629215545.GA46360@stack.nl>
Arnoud Engelfriet wrote:
> Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote:
<snip>
>> * A consideration: if the license document specifies consideration to
>> the licensor, the license can't be free.
>
> I think this is the crux of the matter. But -just thinking
> aloud here- what if the consideration is "you promise to
> distribute your derivative works only under these same terms"?
> Something like that anyway. It certainly would be a valuable
> return to the licensor.
Ah, but is it really consideration? Without the license grant, the
derivative works cannot legally be created or distributed at all. This is
merely a restriction on how they can be distributed; as such, it is a
limited grant of permission, not an exchange.
For a similar example, suppose I made the following offer:
"You may withdraw and spend money from my bank account, as long as you spend
10% of the money you take out on chocolate."
Without the agreement, you can't spend *any* money from my bank account.
With the agreement, you can, although you have to spend some of it in a
particular way.
--
There are none so blind as those who will not see.
Reply to: