jcowan at reutershealth.com
Thu Oct 24 19:01:07 UTC 2002
Ken Brown scripsit:
> Ownership is control to me. Courts would agree. If you waive your
> ownership, you waive your control...vice versa.
No, you don't. Ownership is the right to exercise control, not the
duty to do so. If you waive control, you waive it.
> Copyright is control
> whether you like it or not. Second, I cannot understand how you can connect
> the derivative works clause in the GPL to permissions and rights expected by
> copyright enforcement courts in this country.
Copyright ownership means you have the right to allow or disallow certain
things. The GPL allows certain things and disallows others.
> Lets say I write a code that disables the function of an F1 key. Even
> though its an error, I distribute my code under the strict terms that say
> you cannot fix this problem. I GPL the code. The GPL says that owners can
> make the modification. Copyright or not, explain to me how I could possibly
> forbid anyone from making the change?
You can't. Either you distribute under the GPL or you don't (or you distribute
some copies under the GPL and others not).
You are a child of the universe no less John Cowan
than the trees and all other acyclic http://www.reutershealth.com
graphs; you have a right to be here. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
--DeXiderata by Sean McGrath jcowan at reutershealth.com
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
More information about the License-discuss