Sean 'Shaleh' Perry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The author can not take away ant rights that were granted. Of > course this is my interpretation of comments made here and > elsewhere. Anyone else care to weigh in?
IANAL but this has been discussed extensively in for example Slashdot, and the current theory of licensing in the US and probably in EU as well is that a non-profit license can be revoked. It would mean that the copies in existence would stay legal but you couldn't distribute them any longer. The key here is that if the licensee compensates the licenser in any way, then the license can not be revoked, but if no compensation is made, then the license may be revoked by the licenser at will. -- * Sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology (T.P) * * PGP public key available @ http://www.iki.fi/killer *
