Re: GPL v3 Draft

["Alexander Terekhov" <alexander.terekhov@gmail.com>]

On 2/22/06, olive <olive.lin@versateladsl.be> wrote:
[...]
> The GPL give you *more* permissions than copyright law; so a
> contract is not needed because the forbidden things by the GPL
> are forbidden by copyright law anyway. If you break the GPL
> you just can get sued because you have distributed/modified
> softwares without the required permission.

Distribution of authorized (not pirated) copies is permitted under 17 USC 109.

Similarly, owners of authorized copies can modify software under 17 USC 117.

So "distributed/modified" (WITHOUT AUTHORITY OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNERS)
of publicly available GPL'd works is explicitly permitted by the
copyright law.

It doesn't require permission. Copyright doesn't contemplate copyleft.

regards,
alexander.