[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program
From: |
Dave Crossland |
Subject: |
Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program |
Date: |
Wed, 28 May 2008 03:06:11 -0700 (PDT) |
User-agent: |
G2/1.0 |
On May 27, 12:16 pm, Alexander Terekhov <terek...@web.de> wrote:
> Dave Crossland wrote:
> > Public Domain works can be included in
> > a copyrighted work, and if modified, the modifications are subject to
> > copyright.
>
> The copyright in a derivative work doesn't cover elements taken from
> preexisting work and employed in a derivative work. (It "extends only
> to the material contributed by the author of such work, as
> distinguished from the preexisting material employed in the work" 17
> USC 103).
Thanks for the reference to what I said :-)
> Hence it is absolutely impossible to have a derivative work
> based on preexisting public domain material copyright licensed "as a
> whole" under GNUtian viral theory of "work based on". Got it now?
I got it - have you? :-)
The works that are subject to copyright must be licensed "as a whole"
under the GPL. The works that are public domain are not subject to
copyright. Hence it is absolutely trivial to have a derivative work
based on preexisting public domain material copyright licensed under
the GPL.
Are you a lawyer, btw?
> > You have totally misunderstood what "sublicensing" is: It is a legal
>
> The act of sublicensing is what happens when a licensee becomes a
> licensor to some other party by granting some or all of the exclusive
> rights that they received as a licensee.
AIUI, it is "all," not "some or all."
> The thing is that nonexclusive copyright licenses are generally
> indivisible as a matter of law (this is referred to as "settled law" in
> every source you can find) unless the licensing contract states
> otherwise. This means that a nonexclusive license does not carry an
> implicit sublicense agreement. With the exception of the MIT License
> (which contains a sublicense clause), permissive licenses generally do
> not include a sublicense right and instead offer a direct grant of
> rights from the original licensor to any recipient of source code
> released by him or her under that license.
>
> Actually, according to the 9th Circuit, exclusive licensees are not
> transferable or sublicenseable either unless the licensing contract
> states otherwise. See Gardner v. Nike, a case which appears to have
> surprised a lot of lawyers at the time:
>
> http://www.law.berkeley.edu/institutes/bclt/pubs/annrev/exmplrs/csum/...
>
> Hth.
I fail to see how this realtes to programs made up of MIT X11 + GPL
code.
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, (continued)
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, Dave Crossland, 2008/05/27
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, Alexander Terekhov, 2008/05/27
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2008/05/27
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, Dave Crossland, 2008/05/28
- Message not available
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, Miles Bader, 2008/05/29
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, David Kastrup, 2008/05/29
- Message not available
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, rjack, 2008/05/28
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, rjack, 2008/05/26
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, Dave Crossland, 2008/05/27
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, Alexander Terekhov, 2008/05/27
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program,
Dave Crossland <=
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, Alexander Terekhov, 2008/05/28
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, Alexander Terekhov, 2008/05/27
- Re: Using non-GPL libraries in a GPL program, rjack, 2008/05/27