On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 02:20:15PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > Arnout Engelen wrote: >> If you don't have the copyright to a piece of code you wrote, for example >> because you wrote it for your employer, then this means you are *not allowed* >> to distribute this code. Not under the GPL, and not under whatever >> other license either. >> >> To distribute the code, you must either get the copyright on the work back, >> or get permission from the actual copyright holder (employer, institution) to >> do so. > > You misunderstood my broken English. GPL only allows a copyleft, that's > why no institute or professor can use GPL licensed code and take on the > copyright. > > I don't think any institute is allowed to take on a copyright by using GPL > licensed code.
Example. Say I'm employed, and I'm working on some project for my employer. I download some GPL'ed code, and write some nontrivial additions to it. This now means the institution has the copyright on the code I wrote. If I'd want to distribute this software, I'd need 2 things: 1) distribute it under the GPL 2) ask my employer to either: a) grant me my copyright back on the additions b) give me permission to distribute the software under the GPL If I wouldn't do (1), I would violate the copyright of the original author of the GPL'ed code I download. If I wouldn't do (2), I would violate the copyright of my employer. In other words, if my employer doesn't give me permission to distribute the work I did for him, I cannot distribute it at all, regardless of the GPL. The instition is still bound by the GPL though, so they can't distribute the software under anything other than the GPL - but they can still choose not to distribute at all. Arnout _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
