Subject: Licenses for "Running"
From: Adam Theo <adamtheo@theoretic.com>
Date: Wed, 6 Jun 2001 13:13:36 -0400

hello, all.

just to note, this is cross-posted to both the FSB list at crynwr.com
and the Bazaar list at my own theoretic.com (a list for open source
'newbies' that i just began).

i am taking this day to read up on the FSF and GNU's materials on
copyright, licensing, etc, to educate myself on exactly what they are.

i have one question right now. i think i understand that copyright, as
done by the US Fed Gov't, does nothing for *running* a software, only
for making copies of it, correct?

therefore, proprietary licenses (such as from Microsoft or such), only
enforce the fees they charge for being able to make copies of their
software, not actually running it on user's computers, correct?

so, with that established (i hope i understand that right?), is there
anyway to have 'running clauses' in a license? i take it not, or else
this would have become the default software license, and besides, a
'license' is just really short for 'copyright license'. there is no
such thing as a 'usage license', i assume?

just trying to comprehend this, being a newbie myself.

thanks, all.

-- 
   /\    --- Adam Theo ---
  //\\   Theoretic Solutions (www.Theoretic.com)
 /____\     Software, Politics, and Advocacy
/--||--\ email: theo@theoretic.com   AIM: Adam Theo 2000
   ||    jabber: adamtheo@jabber.org   ICQ: 3617306
   ||  "Did you ever get the feeling the world was a tuxedo,
   ||     and you were a pair of brown shoes?"