Sponsored link
Serve your customers, not your servers, with VERIO Linux VPS. Full-access test-drive here.
| Weekly edition | Kernel | Security | Distributions | Search |
| Archives | Calendar | Subscribe | Write for LWN | LWN.net FAQ |
I don't think a license is considered property.
I don't think a license is considered property.
Posted Dec 4, 2003 17:29 UTC (Thu) by guybar (subscriber, #798)In reply to: Not So Simple by coriordan
Parent article: The GPL Is a License, not a Contract
When I give you a license, it it yours, not mine
Are you sure about this ? AFAI understood the article, a license is
not property, i.e. it is neither "mine" nor "yours", but rather
it is a permission allowing "me" or "you" to use the owner's property.
A permission could be irrevokable, or not.
The GPL, AFAIK, cannot be revoked. But I see no reason why other
licenses (like, say, the permission to fish in a lake) couldn't.
(Log in to post comments)
I don't think a license is considered property.
Posted Dec 4, 2003 18:13 UTC (Thu) by ncm (subscriber, #165) [Link]
The GPL does not claim to be irrevocable. It's not clear that it would be even if it did say so. (That's probably why it doesn't.) The owner is allowed to change his mind about anything, including the revocation. He can't do it retroactively, but that doesn't help us much.Revocation wouldn't make existing copies illegal, but it would keep you from distributing more.