GPL disclaimer invalid?

[Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.]

No. The GPL's terms mean it governs only 3 of the possible 5 rights included
in the bundle of copyright. The five are: display, copy, public performance,
derivative work (in the GPL, the term is the inartful term, modification),
and distribution. The GPL is silent on display and public performance. Why?
I suspect someone thought these rights were not important. They are now, if
the work is of a certain type..e.g., games or multimedia. One could also
argue that moral rights are in the GPL, and apply if the license is enforced
in places that extensively recognize such rights (e.g., the UK).

Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
www.cyberspaces.org
rod at cyberspaces.org


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Justin Wells [mailto:jread at semiotek.com]
> Sent: Saturday, April 01, 2000 12:18 PM
> To: license-discuss at opensource.org
> Subject: GPL disclaimer invalid?
>
>
> The GPL specifically says that it covers only matters relating to the
> copying, distribution, and modification of the software. Everything
> else is explicitly beyond the scope of the license.
>
> Does that mean that the GPL's disclaimer does not apply to use of the
> software?
>
> The authors of GPL'd software would then be protected from damages
> relating to the copying, modification, and distribution of the software,
> but not for the more likely case of damages resulting from use.
>
> Justin
>
>