> Yep that is what I am thinking in less words, if a person can not license their own works as they see fit then what rights do they have.
It's not about licensing. You cannot, under German Law, deny authorship. As I understand it (IANAL), the clause is a bit like a mandatory "BSD- style" give-credit-to-the-author term. It doesn't affect any of your rights regarding licensing - the work as such is still transferrable in any way whatsoever, and the right to publication or the right to exploit it (non)commercially isn't necessary yours just because you wrote it. But you always retain authorship, and the right/plight to state that you wrote it originally. Yes, "plight". You can't deny that you did it. You have to state it was you. That's a reason, why, for example, german translations of books written in foreign languages have to state both the original author AND the translator. The translator has no rights in the work other than being named - his/her work was requested by the publisher, who paid for it and hence got all the "rights" to the work - except that the publisher has no "right" not to name the translator... except by not publishing the translation ... These things (Is writing software akin to publishing/creating a "work of art", or is it like manufacturing ?) are hotly debated legally, of course. With no clear end in sight, as some benefit more if software is treated as work of art (to get copyright protection), while others would rather see it being treated as a produce of manufacturing (to be able to claim patentability). FrankH. _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
