On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 16:11:21 -0800 Michael K. Edwards wrote: > On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 23:41:16 +0100, Francesco Poli > <frx@firenze.linux.it> wrote: > > On Mon, 10 Jan 2005 10:32:02 -0800 Michael K. Edwards wrote: > > > > > The GPL purports to bind the licensor to issue a perpetual > > > (barring breach) license to copy, sublicense, etc. > > ^^^^^^^^^^ > > > > I don't see where the GPL permits me to sublicense... > > I think it's implicit in granting the right to distribute a modified > work, since that usually requires permission from the copyright holder > on the original work even if one is already licensed to copy and > distribute the original. But that is not what "sublicensing" means, at least AFAIK. In my understanding "sublicensing" means redistributing under a different license, and that is what a copyleft license is supposed to not allow... If I'm wrong, then someone please explain me what's the meaning of "sublicensing"! [...] > > I'm not convinced by your arguments: I still can't see where the > > licensor is bound to do something. > > > > Suppose Jessica F. Hacker wrote a program and followed the > > instructrions she found at the end of the GPLv2 text. > > Then she uploaded the source tarball to Savannah and disappeared (in > > the sense that nobody ever heard of her anymore). > > What are her obligations? I fail to see any... > > She has issued a promise not to pursue a copyright infringement claim > (that's what a copyright license is, basically, at least in the case > law I've read). I'm really surprised by your definition: in my understanding, a copyright license is a permission to perform copyright-restricted operations. Quoting from http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html#wci | Section 106 of the 1976 Copyright Act generally gives the owner of | copyright the exclusive right to do and to authorize others to do the | following: ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ [list of restricted operations follows] And (after a "dict license"): | From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]: | | license | n 1: a legal document giving official permission to do | something [syn: {licence}, {permit}] In general, a "license" is a "permission", not a "promise not to punish forbidden actions"... [...] > It's not like I'm making this stuff up. The law on copyright could > have been different, given a different history; and for all I know, it > may be different in Italy. [...] I do not think Italian "diritto d'autore" and U.S. copyright laws differ in a significant manner, as long as what we are now discussing is concerned. I mean: there *are* differences (such as moral rights...), but they do not have significant influence on the answer of the question "what is a copyright license?". -- Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday. ...................................................................... Francesco Poli GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 Key fingerprint = C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4
Attachment:
pgpoGNK4Daejy.pgp
Description: PGP signature