On Sun, Jun 24, 2001 at 06:42:22PM -0400, Chloe Hoffman wrote: > For example, consider the earlier condition in almost all open source > licenses that "force" the user to "speak" the license notice, the > disclaimer, etc.; consider clauses that requires the insertion of > trademark or patent notices; consider any agreement that requires a > publisher to publish a novel; etc. etc.
Requiring that the license remain attached to the copyrighted work is very different from requiring boilerplate material be inserted in non-copyrighted works (which, in the Debian context, would typically be prepared and distributed by only vaugely affiliated parties). Or do you have examples to the contrary? > The linking issue is a whole other matter. I am saying there that an > end-user has, subject to and in compliance with the GPL license terms, a > wide right to modify on the end-user's computer. I believe you're talking about fair use. Does fair use apply when 10000 users wind up with identical unlicensed copies of the same copyrighted work? > I am trying to understand the basis for infringement where the user > combines GPL code on the end-user's computer with another non-GPL > program under broad modification/combination rights provided by the > GPL (in the matter under consideration a non-GPL program and GPL > library linked thereto). Copyright doesn't care how the copies are made. It doesn't care about unique individual actions. It does "care" about large-scale copying+distribution. -- Raul
