Re: review of package "inform"
"Joe Smith" <email@example.com> writes:
> If an author (and copyright holder) places his work in an archive
> whose sole purpose is to diseminate copies to anybody for personal
> use, is that not a effeciftively a license grant to make copies for
> personal use? I'll admit it is a best an implicit license, but one
> due to a very specific and deleribate action on the part of the
> copyright holder.
Where copyright law is concerned, it's best not to assume that
"implicit" has any weight at all.
TTBOMK, without an explicit written grant of license from the
copyright holder to the recipient, the recipient has no legal
justification to perform any act reserved to the copyright holder,
regardless of any other actions of the copyright holder.
Individuals may choose to ignore this and perform those acts anyway,
in which case they bear the burden of that risk. Debian, preferring
not to unilaterally place such burden on its users, has in the main
chosen not to second-guess the unstated intentions of copyright
\ "Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion |
`\ is answers that may never be questioned." —anonymous |