[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: More FSF hypocrisy

From: Rjack
Subject: Re: More FSF hypocrisy
Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2009 09:30:14 -0400
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20090302)

Hyman Rosen wrote:
Rjack wrote:
How many times do you have to be told that the Copyright Act does not grant an *EXCLUSIVE RIGHT* to control the distribution
 of a derivative work "as a whole"?

The copyright acts grants the exclusive right to authorize the copying and distribution of a specific work. Inherent in that exclusive right is the right to control the details of that authorization, exemplified by book authors selling hardcover and paperback publication rights to separate publishers.

The GPL is not asserting control over distributing the combined or derivative work as a whole. It simply says that if you wish to copy and distribute the covered work as part of a combined or derivative work, you may do this only if you distribute the work as a whole under the GPL.

That's fine. . . if it's in the privity of contract. Attempting
to bind all third parties under the GPL provisions is against public
policy (unenforceable).

If you can't or won't do that, you have no permission to include the GPLed work in the combined work. Nothing forces the copyright
 holder of the GPLed work to grant such permission, and copyright
 law forbids copying and distributing the GPLed work as part of a
 combined work absent that permission.

Just because contractual agreements are voluntary doesn't make
any illegal terms in those agreements enforceable.

reply via email to

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