Alexander Terekhov <terek...@web.de> writes: > David Kastrup wrote: > [...] >> > http://www.lehrer-online.de/dyn/bin/366209-369076-1-uebertragung_von_nutzungsrechten.pdf >> > >> > "Inhabern ausschließlicher Nutzungsrechte vorbehalten >> > >> > Die Einräumung von Unternutzungsrechten ist allerdings dem Inhaber >> > eines ausschließlichen Nutzungsrechtes vorbehalten (§ 31 Abs. 3 UrhG); >> > einfache Nutzungsrechte berechtigen demgegenüber nicht zur Einräumung >> > von Unternutzungsrechten." >> >> So where is the problem? It says that giving somebody "right to use" is > > Under the German copyright act ONLY EXCLUSIVE LICENSEES CAN > SUBLICENSE.
Wrong. You still don't get it. Exclusive licensees _automatically_ receive the right to sublicense. A non-exclusive licensee does not _per_ _se_ have the right to sublicense. But if the license terms _grant_ him sublicensing possibilities, he can certainly make use of him. You can license people to exercise almost any right you have, except for _personal_ rights, those bound to the originator. Like the claim of authorship. > For example, the MIT License > > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php > > "the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, > sublicense," > > is VOID regarding sublicensing under the German law. _Exactly_ because non-exclusive licensees do not get the right to sublicense automatically, these terms are granting something which the licensee otherwise could not do. You are getting it backwards. -- David Kastrup _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
