On Fri, 15 May 2009 09:13:57 -0700, Darren New wrote:

> If I take copyrighted proprietary software and link it with copyrighted
> GPL'ed software, who can give me permission to distribute the result?

Clearly nobody, because linking proprietary software with GPL'ed software 
(that is not licensed under a dual license) violates the terms of the GPL.

>> In the case of book
>> authorship, for example, copyright is assigned to the publisher while
>> the book is considered in print.  When a book goes out of print, the
>> contract between the author and publisher determines what happens to
>> the copyright.
> 
> Yes. In that case, only one entity has copyright on the work, in which
> case the rights are exclusive. 

Copyright by definition is an exclusive right, though.

> However, there's nothing that prevents
> multiple people from having copyrights on the work. It's possible for
> (for example) the director or studio to have a copyright on the film,
> and the musicians to have a copyright on the soundtrack. 

The director/studio has a compilation copyright in cases where they've 
sought permission of the copyright holder for the music they've included 
(assuming it's not covered under fair use, but that's another discussion).

> This sort of
> thing held up numerous releases when rental DVDs first started getting
> popular, because nobody had pre-negotiated with the band for DVD rights.

Right, but at the same point the work is not released to the public 
because the rights are not properly licensed.

>> When the book was declared out of print, I got a letter from the
>> publisher stating that the copyright rights were being transferred to
>> me and my co-author, in accordance with our contract.
> 
> It's not impossible for exactly one entity to hold a copyright. It's
> just not necessary. Copyright doesn't give you permission to copy
> things. It gives you permission to prevent others from copying things. A
> license gives you permission to make copies, not copyright.

Legally, copyright is "the exclusive right of the author or creator of a 
literary or artistic property (such as a book, movie or musical 
composition) to print, copy, sell, license, distribute, transform to 
another medium, translate, record or perform or otherwise use (or not 
use) and to give it to another by will."

> Just like patents. If the device uses three different patented
> technologies, any one of those patent holders can refuse to license you
> their patent.

Right, in which case you cannot produce the device.

> IANAL, but I did study this stuff in school.

I'm not either, and didn't study it in school, but I've followed the 
debate with great interest and have studied it a bit on my own.

Clearly, though, the laws aren't clear, which is why there's such a 
debate about it. :-)

Jim

Post a reply to this message