Re: Another GNU License Question

[mike3]

On Aug 20, 8:35 am, byron@upstairs.(none) (Byron Jeff) wrote:
> In article <1187586170.912757.11...@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
>
> mike3 <mike4...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >On Aug 12, 9:33 pm, John Hasler <j...@dhh.gt.org> wrote:
> >>mike3writes:
> >> > Ie., if you owned all the program, for example.
>
> >> Or if the program has been distributed to you under the terms of the GPL.
>
> >> > But why doesn't this hired guy automatically get license to distribute
> >> > your "free" software?
>
> >> Because a copy of it has not been distributed to him.  He merely has
> >> temporary possession of a copy in his capacity as your agent.
>
> >That makes more sense. But could you grant him additional permissions
> >if you wanted?
>
> Of course. You could in fact distribute the code to him/her under the
> GPL if you like. But in a work for hire situation, that isn't an
> automatic distribution. So until it's specifically distributed to them
> under the GPL, they do not have the right to redistribute that code.
>
> BAJ

That makes more sense. Thanks for the clarification.