Re: EASTERBROOK's "quick look" on the GPL and Wallace's claim

[Richard Tobin]

In article <4554EE8E.7A2A09BD@web.de>,
Alexander "Plonker" Terekhov  <terekhov@web.de> wrote:

>> > To surrender something you must first have it.  So when was it that they
>> > had the right to distribute the derivative work for a charge?  Before or
>> > after they accepted the GPL?

[...]

>One just can't charge *for* a derivative work before it is created 
>(futures aside for a moment :-) ). A copyright arises as soon as 
>(derivative) work is created (lawfully). 17 USC 117 allows creation 
>of derivative works (adaptations) without a license.

Typical Terekhov twisting.  I ask when you have a right to distribute,
and you reply that you have a right to create.

>The GPL acceptance is triggered by distribution of *already created* 
>derivative works under the terms of the GPL. 

And until you accept the licence, you have no right to distribute.

>> > plonked

Are you going to wait for someone else to follow up my article before
you reply this time, Mr Plonker?

-- Richard
-- 
"Consideration shall be given to the need for as many as 32 characters
in some alphabets" - X3.4, 1963.