Jim Henderson wrote:
> 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.

That's exactly my point. Even the owner of the copyrights can't publish the 
result.

> Copyright by definition is an exclusive right, though.

I don't believe that's the case, once you start getting into work that is 
composed of multiple copyrightable elements. However, IANAL, so you might be 
right.

I can have a compilation copyright on a collection of individually 
copyrighted stories, if you want to talk about prose, yes?

> 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).

Right. But without the license, they can't make copies even tho they hold 
the compilation copyright.

>> 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.

That's my point. You have multiple entities with copyright on the work. It's 
not the case that anyone with a copyright on the work may make copies. It's 
the case that anyone with a copyright on the work may *prevent* copies.

> 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."

I think "exclusive right" doesn't mean it excludes others from holding a 
copyright. It means you have the exclusive right on the work you created. 
But if someone else creates a work based on yours, you don't get to 
distribute theirs, and they don't get to distribute yours, so it's possible 
you're deadlocked.

Which is important in this discussion.

>> 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.

Yes. Having a patent doesn't allow you to make the device. Having the patent 
allows you to stop others from making the device.

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

Oh, I think they're clear as any other if you're an IP lawyer. We just don't 
have definitive resources, as well as living in different countries with 
different laws.

-- 
   Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
   There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!

Post a reply to this message