[ Date Index ] [ Thread Index ] [ <= Previous by date / thread ] [ Next by date / thread => ]
On Fri, Jul 14, 2006 at 01:37:14PM +0100, Neil Williams wrote: > You may have paid for a licence to use software and paid for some media > to transport that software to your machine(s), but you only own software > you have written yourself (and if you release that under the GPL, you're > the author but no longer the owner anyway). You "own" it as much as if you didn't release it under the GPL. You have copyright over it. You allow others to copy it given the terms in the GPL, you don't have to obey those terms as you don't have to accept the GPL, in which case normal copyright law applies, and as you have copyright of that program you simply need to give yourself permission, which I usually do for a small fee :) > That's why free software isn't such a confusing term - software cannot > be traded like cars, only the media can be traded, the software has to > be licensed. If you want to copy software in certain circumstances you need a license to copy it, but you don't need a license to run it. > Free software therefore means a free licence - a licence > that gives you freedom to use that software your way. No, it gives you the freedom to avoid the restrictions imposed by copyright law, like making a copy for your neighbour, modifying it etc. > EULA. End User Licence Agreement. Which is arguably not a contract, certainly not one I agreed to, yet I am currently using windows 2000 (with putty, ssh'd into my home machine) If a 5 yearold clicks "I agree" when they install software, then they aren't hold to the terms of that contract. There are many other things in contract law about unreasonable terms etc. that apply too. -- The Mailing List for the Devon & Cornwall LUG http://mailman.dclug.org.uk/listinfo/list FAQ: http://www.dcglug.org.uk/linux_adm/list-faq.html