Re: GPL, "license upgrades", and the obligation to offer source code

[Raul Miller <moth.debian@gmail.com>]

On 5/11/05, Michael K. Edwards <m.k.edwards@gmail.com> wrote:
> I agree with your wish, with respect to certain of my works.
> Unfortunately, under 17 USC, the only way to avoid transfer of my
> termination interest in copyright assignments and licenses is for my
> work to have been a "work made for hire". 

On the other hand, the termination is not for 35 years after the grant.  
And, in the case of the GPL, everyone gets an independent grant:

   Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on 
   the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license 
   from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the 
   Program subject to these terms and conditions.

This might not be as effective as a "work made for hire" for a shell 
corporation, but I wouldn't want to bet that these license grants are
ineffective, either.

Also, if a currently valid work is being actively maintained, 
it's possible that an original author who is dead for 35 years 
will no longer own a majority of the work.

Anyways, I'm more worried about new legislation that changes
the rules in an unfair fashion than I'm worried about this one.
But the best defense against new legislation is having a strong 
and growing free software community.

-- 
Raul