Re: Open Software License v2.1

[Michael Poole <mdpoole@troilus.org>]

Brian Thomas Sniffen writes:

> Raul Miller <moth@debian.org> writes:
> 
> > On Sun, Sep 26, 2004 at 07:38:14PM +0100, Andrew Suffield wrote:
> >> The form of both is "Since <person> performs <action>, <person> shall
> >> be punished by terminating their license". The claim was that this is
> >> somehow acceptable.
> >
> > There are cases where this is acceptable.
> >
> > For example, where <action> involves distributing a GPL licensed program
> > without including the copyright notices.
> 
> I disagree.  I think the phrasing Andrew should have used is "Since
> <person> performs <action reserved to licensor without this license>..."

This is not legally accurate.  US copyright law, for example, reserves
for the original author the right to distribute the work and to create
derived works.  It does not reserve to him the right to distribute
derived works; the GPL limits that by only granting the first two
rights if you agree to its terms.

Michael Poole