It bears repeating that the GPL is a *copyright* licence. [LWN.net]

It bears repeating that the GPL is a copyright licence.

Posted Oct 29, 2005 0:53 UTC (Sat) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)
In reply to: It bears repeating that the GPL is a *copyright* licence. by xoddam
Parent article: Quote of the week

I'm not a copyright lawyer, but I have heard that one of the exlusive privileges the copyright owner has is to "prepare derivative works," and that that doesn't just mean to copy the derivative work. I've heard it said that even if you want to create a derivative work for your own personal amusement, you need permission from the copyright owner. Seems out of place in copyright law, but I've seen the US statute, and it really does say "prepare."

In 1998, a person was editing Titanic video tapes to remove the sex and make it watchable by some very sensitive people. A person would bring him his own copy of the tape and the editor would clip out some of the tape and charge him $5. The copyright owner of Titanic claimed it was a copyright violation. I don't think there was ever an authoritative resolution.

(If you're a Titanic fan, I know you want to know where the indecent scenes are in it: there are two: one where Dicaprio sketches Winslet in the nude and you see her breasts, and another where they have sex in a car with steamed up windows).

(Log in to post comments)