Subject: Re: BSD-like licenses and the OSI approval process
From: "Alexander Terekhov" <alexander.terekhov@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 16 Oct 2007 14:51:35 +0200

On 10/16/07, Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu> wrote:
> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > On 10/16/07, Matthew Flaschen <matthew.flaschen@gatech.edu> wrote:
> >> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> >>>> GPLv3 makes it clear it doesn't remove existing consumer rights (as if
> >>>> any copyright license could do that) by adding "This License
> >>>> acknowledges your rights of fair use or other equivalent, as provided by
> >>>> copyright law."
> >>> The term "fair use" is unique to the United States; a similar
> >>> principle, fair dealing, exists in some other common law
> >>> jurisdictions.
> >> Hence the "or other equivalent"....
> >
> > Heck, but "first sale" is NOT equivalent to "fair use" or "fair
> > dealing" (a kind of equivalent to "fair use").
>
> "First sale" is not identical to "fair use", but it's equivalent in the
> sense used here.

Okay, you suggest that I should read

"This License acknowledges your rights of fair use or other
equivalent, as provided by copyright law."

as

"This License acknowledges all limitations on exclusive rights as
provided by copyright law."

and that it overrides all other statements in the GPL contradicting it
(all other statements including all those erroneous proclamations
pointed out by Hollaar), correct?

No wonder nobody can grok the GPL having undrunken state of mind...

regards,
alexander.

--
"To show the falsity of 'PJ''s claims, in most cases I need look no further
than Groklaw itself. 'PJ' wants more journalists to use the site as a
resource, so I'll do just that. Below are excerpts from my story that 'PJ'
says are incorrect, followed by 'PJ''s characterization of them, and my
response -- at times taken directly from Groklaw."

                                     -- http://tinyurl.com/2mn3jc