Re: Licensing question about the BSD

[Bruce Lewis]

John Hasler <john@dhh.gt.org> writes:

> Bruce Lewis writes:
> > If he does not license it under the same terms, then he has no copyright
> > protection; the only copyright in force is for the original GPLed code.
> 
> This is not true.  He is infringing the copyright on the original code by
> distributing the derivative under terms other than those of the GPL but he
> still owns and can enforce the copyright in the portion of the derivative
> that is exclusively his work.

We might or might not be in agreement, depending on what you mean by
"exclusively his work."  If you are talking about portions that form a
creative work independent of the original work, I agree, and I should
have been explicit about that in my previous post.

However, I think that "any part of the work in which such material has
been used unlawfully" may cover portions that do not specifically
include the original portions.  A painting of Mona Lisa's arms and hands
holding my company's product may be "exclusively my work" in that the
brush strokes are all mine, but it may be considered a part of the work
in which the Mona Lisa was used, if it is dependent on lining up with
the Mona Lisa for its value.