[License-review] Sublicensing

[Pamela Chestek]

Changing subject line ...

On 9/9/2014 5:04 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
> Once we agree on those basic principles, then it is fair to ask
> whether "sublicensing" actually provides anything different or whether
> it is an ancient commercial licensing word that was thrown into the
> MIT and other licenses among the 17 USC 106 "copyright rights"
> actually being licensed for no important purpose.

I believe the difference will be whether the downstream recipient is
obliged to satisfy the covenants of the license versus the conditions.
One can only sublicense the rights one has, so if the original grant has
conditions on the grant, then the sublicensee will also be obliged to
satisfy the same conditions. However, to the extent the license has
covenants, those are a creature of contract only, and since there is no
privity between the original licensor and sublicensee, the sublicensee
wouldn't be obliged to satisfy the covenants.

Pam

Pamela S. Chestek, Esq.
Chestek Legal
PO Box 2492
Raleigh, NC 27602
919-800-8033
pamela at chesteklegal.com
www.chesteklegal.com
PGP key 246A430A