<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
<span style="white-space: pre;">> First, his does not require
sublicensing since the BSD license<br>
> addresses every downstream recipient of the source code so
licensed.<br>
> It does *not* require that other content *added* to such a work
carry<br>
> the same license. Hence these components can carry with them<br>
> arbitrary >copyright restrictions.</span><br>
<br>
The majority of open source advocates do not understand what the term
“sublicense” means in the context of U.S. copyright law and a
nonexclusive license. A sublicense under copyright law is the transfer
(with the permission of the copyright owner) of specific, existing
contractual rights by <licensee A> to <licensee B> where
<licensee A> *relinquishes* his rights (17 USC sec. 117). No *new
* rights are created and a “sublicense” does not create another newly
authorized license pursuant to17 USC sec. 106 since that is the
exclusive right of the owner of copyright. The term “downstream
licensing” from licensee A to licensee B to licensee C . . . is a legal
fiction. You can’t license what you don’t own.<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>