On 9/5/2015 2:24 PM, John Cowan wrote: > Pamela Chestek scripsit: > >> I think this statement is a fallacy, but I'm happy to hear other >> opinions. A license attaches to the intangible copyright, not to the >> tangible copy of the work you received. So as long as I can show that >> the same copyrighted work was available under a license, and that I am >> in compliance with the license, then I am a licensed user no matter >> where I got my copy of the work. > That can't be right. Consider a work available under GPL+proprietary > terms, where you get to do non-GPL things if you have paid. Then it would > not be enough to show that the work was available under a proprietary > license to allow you to download it and do those things. > Sure I could, if it was a license that was offered to me and I complied with the terms (including paying); my performance manifested my acceptance of the offer. Same with a FOSS license, it is an offer and I accept through performance.
Pam Pamela S. Chestek Chestek Legal PO Box 2492 Raleigh, NC 27602 919-800-8033 pam...@chesteklegal.com www.chesteklegal.com _______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
