18 Oct
2007
18 Oct
'07
3:11 p.m.
Hi,
On Wed, Oct 17, 2007 at 10:15:59PM +0100, Keith Sharp wrote:
On Wed, 2007-10-17 at 22:40 +0200, Lars Luthman
wrote:
This is not true. You have fair use rights.
A copyright licence is a licence, not a contract.
It can only grant
additional rights to the ones you are already given under your
copyright
law, not remove any of them. In virtually every country the copyright
holder can do whatever he or she wants with his or her own work, and
releasing it under a licence that grants additional rights to others
can
never change that.
In most countries (certainly the UK) a non-copyright holder starts from
a position of zero rights. The only way I can access a copyright item
is by a licence from the copyright holder that grants me rights. In the
case of LS/libgig I am being granted two sets of (possibly) incompatible
rights by two different licences from the same copyright holder. I am being licenced use of LS under the terms of the
GPL V2 + a
restriction on redistribution as a commercial product. I am also being
licenced the use of libgig under a pure GPL V2 licence. The problem is
that the pure GPL V2 libgig "virally infects" LS and the result is a
(possible) breach of the terms of the GPL V2, and the GPL V2 states that
if you breach the licence all rights granted under it are withdrawn. So
at this point I have no licence to use libgig and I am in breach of
copyright.
Only if you distribute binaries. Compiling, linking, and using the software on
your end is fair use.
-Forest
--
Forest Bond
http://www.alittletooquiet.net