Lars Gullik Bj�nnes wrote:
| But what happens when a program has no license? I mean nothing. Nobody | is allowed to own it, and that's what we want, right?
No. the author still has the copyright. so if there is no license that means that nobody can use it (without explict permision from the author).
Because I'm a newbie in licence issues, I asked a german lawyer and he explained me the german copyright as follows:
If some one publishes copyright protectable material without any copyright/license, he lost the copyright (he automatically renounces the copyright). There is no way to get the copyright back, so it is forever public domain.
That means cvs2lyx is public domain in german law, because it was published on my website without copyright. But it is not under US american law, as I learned from Jos�'s mail:
http://news.gmane.org/gmane.editors.lyx.general/cutoff=18334
One may correct me if I'm wrong.
Under
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/result.xhtml?url=/newsticker/meldung/49377&words=GPL
you can read (in german) that the GPL was only once proofed by an official court:
"Damit ist endg�ltig klar, dass das GPL-Modell auch nach deutschem Recht funktioniert", frohlockte Rechtsanwalt Till Jaeger, der das Projekt netfilter/iptables vertritt, im Gespr�ch mit heise online. Nach diesem "wohl weltweit ersten Urteil zur Wirksamkeit und Durchsetzbarkeit der GPL" sei sichergestellt, dass die Open-Source-Gemeinde wehrhaft ist.
In english:
"Now it is clearified, that the GPL-model works under the german law", rejoiced the lawyer Till Jaeger, who appeared for the project netfilter/iptables, in the interview with heise online. After this "probably worldwide unique judgment for the effectivity and enforceability of the GPL" it is assured, that the open source community is well-fortified.
That means that nobody knows if the GPL is valid in other countries. Astonishing, isn't it?
But anyway I'll contact the author tomorrow.
regards Uwe
