Re: GPL-licensed packages with depend-chain to OpenSSL
On 06 Sep 2004 02:54:00 +0200, Claus Färber <claus@xn--frber-gra.muc.de> wrote:
> Andrew Suffield <asuffield@debian.org> schrieb/wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 05, 2004 at 09:07:00PM +0200, Claus F?rber wrote:
> >> Of course, in such simple cases, they can be thought of having given
> >> implicit permission to link against OpenSSL.
>
> > There is no such thing as implicit permission in copyright law (or
> > even contract law). That only works for verbal agreements.
>
> That's certainly not universally true for any legistlation. I even fail
> to see how an "verbal agreement" is not covered by "contract law" even
> in the UK.
>
> For German law, for example, my statement above is valid.
There are definitely implicit copyright licenses in (US) copyright case law.
Let me know if you want me to cite some cases... It usually involves
someone voluntarily contributing to a larger work. For example, if
I'm shooting a movie and ask you to help out and you do (fully aware
of the nature of the project), you've effectively granted me an
implicit license to use your contributions (to the extent that they're
copyrightable) in my work. Of course, specific details can always
change things in court.
--
Joseph Lorenzo Hall
Reply to: