On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 22:14:27 -0600
Isaac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006 09:51:32 +0100, Stefaan A Eeckels
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> > I believe that in both cases, the person or entity wishing to
> > accept the GPL has to be in possession of a lawful copy. For
> > example, if you steal a CD with GPLed software from me, you are not
> > in a position to claim that you are entitled to redistribute this
> > software under the GPL, as I
> While I agree with your result, your result does not require that you
> can only become a licensee by possessing a lawful copy.  Even if the
> the copyright holder were to provide you a written license allowying
> you to copy his software at any time, you would still not have the
> right to come into my house unbidden to copy from my hard drive.

Surely we're discussing how many angles can dance on a pinhead. Can you
please give another way to become a licensee of a GPLed work than by

a) getting a license from the author without first getting a lawful copy

b) accepting the GPL through copying and/or preparing a derivative work.

In the first case, you are a licensee without having a copy. In order
to obtain one, you cannot break the law. Probably, you would be
entitled to make a copy of CD loaned from a friend or a library. You
would not be allowed to steal, or go against instructions of your
employer, or determine for yourself what is the work you licensed. 

In the second, by far the most prevalent case, you need to possess a
lawful copy, because you're not yet a licensee, and hence you cannot
copy anything.

Now please tell me how else this could work instead of merely
suggesting it might be possible. One Alfred suffices.

Take care,

As complexity rises, precise statements lose meaning,
and meaningful statements lose precision. -- Lotfi Zadeh 
Gnu-misc-discuss mailing list

Reply via email to