Alexander Terekhov <terek...@web.de> writes:
> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> BSDL licensed material does not restrict sublicensing to identical
>> terms.
>
> It doesn't permit sublicensing at all you retard dak.
>
> http://books.google.de/books?id=OCGsutgMdPIC&pg=SA4-PA42&lpg=SA4-PA42&dq=sublicensing+explicit+grant&source=bl&ots=JRQwZdnHUl&sig=0b5RXRLLp2OXrNixaZ502i6Sd8Q&hl=de&ei=So6oS47SHqT20wStr_XrDQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CCYQ6AEwBw#v=onepage&q=sublicensing%20explicit%20grant&f=false
> (Intellectual Property Licensing: Forms and Analysis)
>
> "Absent an explicit grant of sublicensing rights, no right to sublicense
> is generally presumed.5 ... 5 Raufast SA v. Kniers Pizzazz, Ltd., 208
> USPQ (BNA) 699 (EDNY 1980). "
What about "Absent an explicit grant of sublicensing rights" do you not
understand?
Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without
modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions
are met:
1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in
the documentation and/or other materials provided with the
distribution.
Note that nothing is being said about adding conditions, or distributing
with a more restrictive set of conditions.
--
David Kastrup
_______________________________________________
gnu-misc-discuss mailing list
gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
