Forest Bond wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 10:18:20AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > >>> Even if you changed headers original done by other authors for more >>> than 50% of the code, it must be noticeable who was the original author >>> and that you changed it. There's a stipulation: "a) You must cause the >>> modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the >>> files and the date of any change." >>> >> I guess this should protect the reliability of the software. If thousand >> people change xyz.h, we need to know if we got the original xyz.h, with >> the original functionality or if we got a derivate, that might has lost >> it's compatibility. Copyrights done under the GPL should protect the >> software and users, less the authors, that's why it's called a copyleft. >> You only can make the software name, logos etc. copyright, not the code, >> if you are using GPL code. >> > > This is false. The GPL doesn't change the meaning of copyright, and it is > worthless without one or more copyright holders (somebody has to have the > copyright in order to apply the license). Authors retain copyright to their > software when they release it under the GPL. The GPL simply grants rights to > others that they otherwise wouldn't have (at least under US law). > > -Forest >
Thanx, I guess I understand and I guess I mean it that way. I got off-list a mail on German. We have a copyright and *related rights* ;). "Urheberrecht" vs "Vervielfältigungsrecht". _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
