[consulting] Copyright

[Eric Goldhagen]

>
>  >
>>  The way I see it one of the most important aspects of the GPL is that
>>  it does not care who owns the copyright, only that it is owned by
>>  someone. Owner and non-owners are granted the same rights.
>>
>Hi Eric,
>
>Not really. In general, copyright owners are special; they can release the
>code to anyone under any license. Which means the copyright owner could 
>release the code to YOU under the GPL, and to someone else under another
>license.

My statement explicitly assumes we are talking about *after* someone 
has already licensed code under the GPL. Once code is under the GPL, 
the copyright holder and anyone else that wants to use the code has 
the same rights to use or modify the code.

Even if the current copyright holder (of a GPL licensed codebase) 
decides they want future versions to be relicensed under a non-free 
license, the current code would still be covered under the GPL. See 
the mambo/joomla split for a great example of this in real life.

>However, if the code cannot be used without Drupal, the copyright owner can't
>release the code to anyone else under any license but the GPL. Of course,
>they don't have to release it to anyone at all.

Unless they have redistributed their changes, in which case they have 
a commitment to return their code to those that maintain the codebase 
they built on top of. Which is why my contracts specify that turning 
over a completed project is considered distribution.

--Eric

-- 
---------------------------------------
Openflows, Inc.
a technology workers cooperative
http://openflows.com
----------------------------