Re: GPL and NDA

[dewar at gnat dot com]

<<I think maybe that your intent was that "that license" should read "that
derivative work"?  I mean what you are saying is that you create a
derivative work for your own use, and don't distribute it, then there is
no requirement that it be licensed under the GPL, and this is what you
go on to say in the rest of your email.   And, AFAIK, this is correct.
>>

NO, I meant what I said, the work is covered by the GPL, only if you, as the
copyright holder of the modifications in the deriviative work, decide to 
license your work this way. Of course if you *don't* license it using the
GPL, then any distribution is a copyright violation, but there is never
any automatic GPL'ing of anything.

<<However I have a concern that this creates a loophole -- not a legal
loophole, an illegal loophole (AFAIK), but a loophole nevertheless.
Let's say I create such a derivative work, and I don't GPL it.  But I
leave it somewhere (accidentally, with no malice aforethought) where
somebody else finds it, with no copyright or GPL notice.  Now they take
it and use it as is or create a derivative work, and distribute it as a
>>

Don't invent law! The fact that something has no copyright notice or GPL
notice in no way affects its copyright status. If you find something, it is
your responsibility to determine its copyright status. Even if there is
a notice, that's no legal guarantee that you can rely on that notice.

For example, if someone manages to find a copy of the source of Power Point
from Microsoft, and puts in GPL headers on all sources and then leaves the
sources "somewhere", then if a third party finds these sources they may assume
that they are free software which can be freely copied, but they assume wrong,
and would be liable for action on the basis that they had violated the
copyright.

You can't copy any copyrighted material unless you have a license to do so.
It is entirely up to you to take the responsibility to determine the copyright
status of anything you copy, and to determine that there is a correct license
that allows you to copy it. If you copy something without having a proper
license, then you are strictly liable for the copyright violation.

Sorry that this thread has gone on so long, I am the guilty party in starting
this, with my question about ia64, but it is hard not to respond to
misinformation.