"Alfred M\. Szmidt" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

>    The content does not magically jump off the copy.  Accessing the
>    content of the copy is the sole right of the copy's owner.
> And since I can leaglly access the content, the GPL jumps into play.

Your access is limited to what the owner of the copy allows you to do
with it.  The GPL grants rights to the owner of the copy, not to you.
Since you have not bought or otherwise acquired ownership of the copy,
you don't get the rights associated with its ownership.

> And I'm allowed to redistribute it, if I so choose;

No.  You just don't understand internal use.  You don't become owner
of the copy just by having to use it in your work.

> and the employeer cannot stop me.

Of course he can.  After all, it is _his_ copy.  He determines its

If you are working in a locksmith shop and take work home with you
with the owner's permission, that does not mean that you are granted
permission to use the owner's tools for breaking into houses.  Even
though that's the purpose that they are sold and licensed for to the
owner.  And even though the tools remain perfectly usable after such a

> (other than by not giving me a copy,

He did not "give" you a copy.  The copy is still his own.  He granted
you temporary use in the course of his work.

I don't give my head to a barber.  I just grant him access to it, and
he is not free to do with it as if it were his own.

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to