[License-review] Sublicensing

[Pamela Chestek]

On 9/11/2014 11:49 AM, Lawrence Rosen wrote:
>
> Hi Pam,
>
>  You raise a good point. Why would we encourage sublicensing then, if
> there is no privity by which to enforce the covenants in the FOSS license?
>
>  FOSS licenses are direct from the copyright owner to the ultimate
> licensee. For example, GPLv3 § 10 expressly avoids sublicensing: "Each
> time you convey a covered work, the recipient automatically receives
> _a license from the original licensors_, to run, modify and propagate
> that work, subject to this License." [Emphasis added.]
>
>  That give the licensor all the privity he needs to enforce his
> license against each and every licensee. No intermediary commercial
> distributor can then interfere with the freedoms or the obligations
> (conditions or covenants) associated with that license.
>
>  IOW, sublicensing hurts. It doesn't help anyone except an
> intermediary distributor who can distribute commercial software with
> hidden FOSS components.
>
I agree completely that it is not in the best interest of FOSS projects
to encourage or allow sublicensing, which I believe is why the GPL took
the position that it is a direct license. My recollection is, too, that
until the GPL came along, the common perception was that the correct
vehicle for serial downstream distribution was through sublicensing,
which is why the earlier licenses specifically allowed for it--but I'm
sure you have more historical knowledge of that than me. And I'll guess
we have all encountered those who, less versed in FOSS, continue to have
the misunderstanding that it works as a matter of sublicensing, not
direct licensing.

And you nailed on the head who it helps, who I suspect are all over the
distinction.

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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opensource.org/pipermail/license-review_lists.opensource.org/attachments/20140912/b6c88eff/attachment.html>