Re: GNU License, Again

[Alexander Terekhov]

David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
> Anyway, you are aware that a software license does not govern a work,
> but a transaction transferring a particular copy?

Software is literary work. A copyright licensee governs rights (modulo 
limitations) regarding (protected elements in) work. One doesn't need 
to be an owner of a copy in order to become a party to a copyright 
license.

One can reproduce works (and do other things reserved to copyright 
owners like for example public performance) from brain's memory.

> 
> That is the reason that the same software can be licensed under
> different licenses, 

More bullshit. Those are simply different contracts (offers) all 
governing rights in the same work. A would-be licensee simply has a 
choice to become a party to any of those license contracts that the 
work is licensed under.


>                      and that passing on a copy is (when using the
> default provisions of copyright law) only permissable when one does
> not retain a copy for one's own use.

One can of course retain copies made pursuant to copyright license 
grant (not those additional copies made under 17 USC 117).

regards,
alexander.