[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: "GPL requirement could have a chilling effect onderivativedistros"

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: "GPL requirement could have a chilling effect onderivativedistros"
Date: Thu, 29 Jun 2006 20:17:22 +0200

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> Qui, 2006-06-29 Ã s 19:35 +0200, Alexander Terekhov escreveu:
> > > Downloading the same program 500 times with the purpose of distributing
> > > these copies (and which results in exactly the same situation as if one
> > > downloaded once and copied 499 times) would not result in 500 lawful
> > > copies,
> >
> > Sure it would. As for "downloaded once and copied 499 times" (in
> > alternative) it's just implied license to save bandwidth. See above.
> There's no such "implied license to save bandwidth". Is that a new
> "right" to be proposed at WIPO?

Think of it as a license for your proxy servers or whatever caching on
the net.

Implied Licenses:

An implied copyright license is a license created by law in the absence 
of an actual agreement between the parties. Implied licenses arise when 
the conduct of the parties indicates that some license is to be extended 
between the copyright owner and the licensee, but the parties themselves 
did not bother to create a license. This differs from an express license 
in that the parties never actually agree on the specific terms of the 

And in the case of "end users"...

A commonly discussed scenario where implied licenses are destined to 
play a major role is on the World Wide Web. When a Web page is viewed 
in a Web browser, the page is downloaded through the Internet and placed 
on the user's screen. It is clear that a copy of the Web page is being 
made by the user. It is also clear that the Web page is protected 
against unauthorized copying by copyright law. But it would not make 
sense to allow the author of a Web page to sue a user who viewed her 
page, since the author intended that the page be viewed by others when 
she placed it on the World Wide Web. Rather, attorneys argue, courts 
should find that the Web page author has given end users an implied 
license to download and view the Web page. The extent of this implied 
license is unclear, and may someday be defined by the courts.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]