Re: GPL misappropriation

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
>>
>> > 2) Copyright law seems even in the US holds that nonexclusive licenses
>> > are clearly indivisible and do not automatically grant sublicense
>> > rights (a sublicense being a new license issued by a licensee).
>> 
>> The GPL is used for distributing the work as a whole.  
>
> The GPL just can't apply to the BSDL licensed material because the
> BSDL doesn't grant sublicensing rights you idiot.

Again: as opposed to patents, copyright applies to rights connected with
physical copies.  The BSDL grants permission to distribute physical
copies with derived contents, as long as the conditions of the BSDL are
met.  Distributing such a copy under the GPL meets the conditions of
some BSDL style licenses.  There is no sublicensing of the original copy
involved here, since obviously we are not talking about the original
physical copy.  We are talking about the creation and distribution of
copies with derived content, under conditions permitted by the BSDL
style license attached to the original copy.

Do you get it now?

-- 
David Kastrup