[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus' gang: "abandon the current GPLv3 pr

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: GPLv3 comedy unfolding -- Linus' gang: "abandon the current GPLv3 process before it becomes too late"
Date: Mon, 25 Sep 2006 23:30:50 +0200

David Kastrup wrote:
> > IBM didn't remain the copyright holder, but FSF just can't be
> > exclusive licensor
> Well, reread what Alfred wrote above.  "exclusive copyright holder".

Yeah, as if copyright ownership can be non-exclusive (in the sense of 
suing strangers -- not parties to license contracts). It all started in 
response to my statement that employer is either legally-recognized 
author or exclusive licensor (the former being US work-for-hire, and the 
later being the default for (not work-for-hire) authors... who may also 
have *inalienable* moral rights; mostly in Europe, that is). Do you know 
what "exclusive licensor" means? It means that only that legal person 
can grant licensees (the right may be limited to a field of use or 
geographic territory). And with respect to assigned stuff, the FSF is 
neither exclusive licensor nor author (in regards to inalienable moral 


reply via email to

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