[License-discuss] Companies that encourage license violations

Pamela Chestek pamela at chesteklegal.com
Wed Sep 16 22:43:57 UTC 2015

On 9/5/2015 2:24 PM, John Cowan wrote:
> Pamela Chestek scripsit:
>> I think this statement is a fallacy, but I'm happy to hear other
>> opinions. A license attaches to the intangible copyright, not to the
>> tangible copy of the work you received. So as long as I can show that
>> the same copyrighted work was available under a license, and that I am
>> in compliance with the license, then I am a licensed user no matter
>> where I got my copy of the work. 
> That can't be right.  Consider a work available under GPL+proprietary
> terms, where you get to do non-GPL things if you have paid.  Then it would
> not be enough to show that the work was available under a proprietary
> license to allow you to download it and do those things.
Sure I could, if it was a license that was offered to me and I complied
with the terms (including paying); my performance manifested my
acceptance of the offer. Same with a FOSS license, it is an offer and I
accept through performance.


Pamela S. Chestek
Chestek Legal
PO Box 2492
Raleigh, NC 27602
pamela at chesteklegal.com

More information about the License-discuss mailing list