Re: Lilypond \include statements and the GPL

[David Kastrup]

Anthonys Lists <address@hidden> writes:

> The GPL *relies* *on* *the* *law*.

Not really.  The GPL grants permissions under conditions.  Of course,
there is little interest in permissions one does not need, so the GPL is
modeled along laws.  But the grant of conditional permissions does not
require the permissions to be actually required.

> If there's a conflict between the GPL and the law, then the law
> wins.

There can't be a conflict since the GPL grants additional permissions.
There may be cases where those permissions are not actually needed, but
that is not a conflict.  It's just redundancy.

> THE LAW TRUMPS THE GPL. END OF!

The law can nullify restrictions.  It can't nullify permissions (unless
the person issuing them was acting without authorization).

> Sorry for shouting, but just go ask a lawyer. ANY lawyer with a
> half-way decent grasp of copyright.

Better get someone with GPL experience.  The concept of a _license_
_granting_ permissions rather than a _contract_ _restricting_ normal
rights associated with a media purchase is pretty alien to most
copyright lawyers.

-- 
David Kastrup