Re: GPL misappropriation

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> > http://www.lehrer-online.de/dyn/bin/366209-369076-1-uebertragung_von_nutzungsrechten.pdf
>> >
>> > "Inhabern ausschließlicher Nutzungsrechte vorbehalten
>> >
>> > Die Einräumung von Unternutzungsrechten ist allerdings dem Inhaber
>> > eines ausschließlichen Nutzungsrechtes vorbehalten (§ 31 Abs. 3 UrhG);
>> > einfache Nutzungsrechte berechtigen demgegenüber nicht zur Einräumung
>> > von Unternutzungsrechten."
>> 
>> So where is the problem?  It says that giving somebody "right to use" is
>
> Under the German copyright act ONLY EXCLUSIVE LICENSEES CAN
> SUBLICENSE.

Wrong.  You still don't get it.  Exclusive licensees _automatically_
receive the right to sublicense.  A non-exclusive licensee does not
_per_ _se_ have the right to sublicense.  But if the license terms
_grant_ him sublicensing possibilities, he can certainly make use of
him.

You can license people to exercise almost any right you have, except for
_personal_ rights, those bound to the originator.  Like the claim of
authorship.

> For example, the MIT License
>
> http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php
>
> "the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute,
> sublicense,"
>
> is VOID regarding sublicensing under the German law.

_Exactly_ because non-exclusive licensees do not get the right to
sublicense automatically, these terms are granting something which the
licensee otherwise could not do.

You are getting it backwards.

-- 
David Kastrup