[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: Another Lilypond Story
From: |
James Moore |
Subject: |
RE: Another Lilypond Story |
Date: |
Fri, 17 Dec 2004 12:24:17 -0800 |
> > The copyright *is* the license, which belongs exclusively
> > to the copyright holder. That's the whole idea of a copyright. Don't
> > attempt to share it with all and sundry, only with BMI/ASCAP or the like
> if
> > you want. A user license would amount to assigning it.
>
> Sorry, I didn't understand the 2 last sentences (limited English skills).
I don't understand them either (native English speaker, 38 years experience
:-]).
Licenses and copyrights are not the same.
A license is essentially permission to do something. When you invite
someone over for dinner, you're giving them a license to come over to your
house. (That's a common example of what a license is in real estate
textbooks.) You can't have them arrested for trespassing, since they have a
license to use your property.
If you own the copyright on a piece of intellectual property, you have the
ability to grant a license to use it, in much the same way you can grant
licenses to use any type of property that you own.
This is from an American point of view - haven't the faintest idea what
European/Asian/etc concepts look like.
- James
- Another Lilypond Story, darius, 2004/12/16
- Re: Another Lilypond Story, Erik Sandberg, 2004/12/16
- Re: Another Lilypond Story, David Raleigh Arnold, 2004/12/16
- Message not available
- Re: Another Lilypond Story, Erik Sandberg, 2004/12/17
- Re: Another Lilypond Story, darius, 2004/12/17
- Re: Another Lilypond Story, dax2, 2004/12/17
- Re: Another Lilypond Story, Darius Blasband, 2004/12/18
Re: Another Lilypond Story, Bertalan Fodor, 2004/12/16