Concurrent Licenses?

[W. Yip]

What do you think of the following excerpt from a paper I am writing?

I am not very confident about this my argument of concurrent licenses, as
where

A licenses to B licenses to C [under GPL]

In such a case, C receives the GPL from B (s.1+2 GPL) as well as A (s.6
GPL).

Do these licenses pertain to the relevant bits of the work? For instance,
s.1 +2 gives license to A's source code base, while s.6 gives license to
B's derivative 'bits'? Or are they the same license?

(Quote begins)-------
Upon (re)distribution, the GPL issues from two sources. Firstly, the
distributor will issue the license to the distributee [1]. This
'distributor' may either be (i) the copyright holder as original licensor,
or (ii) a licensee making a sublicense pursuant to redistribution. This
results in a seemingly unbreakable 'chain of licenses', since the
pre-condition to permitted distribution is the obligation to adopt the same
GPL.

Second, a recipient distributee will also receive a license 'automatically'
from the original licensor who is the copyright holder [2]. It is unclear
whether such 'a license from the original licensor' is the GPL, but it is
submitted that it is an equivalent, because it offers the same permissions
'...to copy, distribute or modify...subject to (the GPL) terms and
conditions.' [3] As a result, any recipient of software under the GPL will
have received a license from (i) his immediate distributor and (ii) the
copyright holder (original licensor). The latter seems a weaker license
because there is an absence of any bilateral dealing.

[1] ss.1 and 2 GPL
[2] s.6 GPL
[3] s.6 GPL

(Quote ends)