On Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 3:50 AM, Massimo Zaniboni < massimo.zanib...@asterisell.com> wrote:
Sincerely I don't fully understand this sentence. Are you saying that if > license A allows me to use, modify and distribuite the code of product A > (like BSD, and ISC are saying), then is it implicit by common laws that I > can distribuite the software using my license terms? Yes, exactly. If you have a license to create derivative works, then those derivative works belong to you, and you may (if there are no terms in the license to the contrary) license the derivative works however you choose. Pace David Woolley, it is not only the *changes* but the *entire* derivative work of which you are the copyright owner. Of course you cannot prevent the making of other derivative works under license from the original author. For example, if Alice publishes the dialogue of a movie made by Bob without a license to do so, then Bob may sue for copyright infringement, and it is no defense that she only quoted words appearing in the novel by Charlie from which the movie was made — unless of course Alice has a separate license from Charlie to do so, and even then Bob may have a copyright interest, because he selected which of Charlie's words to use. Since Bob typically has more money than Charlie, this works out to the advantage of both Bob and Charlie. -- John Cowan http://vrici.lojban.org/~cowan co...@ccil.org Your worships will perhaps be thinking that it is an easy thing to blow up a dog? [Or] to write a book? --Don Quixote, Introduction
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@opensource.org https://lists.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss
