Re: [LAD] Fwd: Fw: Re: At the hands of Professor Keller and Raymond

Forest Bond wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Aug 02, 2009 at 10:18:20AM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
>
>>> Even if you changed headers original done by other authors for more
>>> than 50% of the code, it must be noticeable who was the original author
>>> and that you changed it. There's a stipulation: "a) You must cause the
>>> modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the
>>> files and the date of any change."
>>>
>> I guess this should protect the reliability of the software. If thousand
>> people change xyz.h, we need to know if we got the original xyz.h, with
>> the original functionality or if we got a derivate, that might has lost
>> it's compatibility. Copyrights done under the GPL should protect the
>> software and users, less the authors, that's why it's called a copyleft.
>> You only can make the software name, logos etc. copyright, not the code,
>> if you are using GPL code.
>>
>
> This is false. The GPL doesn't change the meaning of copyright, and it is
> worthless without one or more copyright holders (somebody has to have the
> copyright in order to apply the license). Authors retain copyright to their
> software when they release it under the GPL. The GPL simply grants rights to
> others that they otherwise wouldn't have (at least under US law).
>
> -Forest
>

Thanx, I guess I understand and I guess I mean it that way. I got
off-list a mail on German. We have a
copyright and *related rights* ;). "Urheberrecht" vs
"Vervielfältigungsrecht".
_______________________________________________
Linux-audio-dev mailing list
Linux-audio-dev@email-addr-hidden
http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
Received on Mon Aug 3 00:15:06 2009