Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@enter.net> writes:

quoted text
> US Copyright law. A copyright holder, regardless of what license he/she may 
> have released the work under, can still revoke the license for a specific 
> person or group of people. (There are some exceptions, but they do not apply 
> to the situation that is being discussed)

Oh come on, I thought some small country in maybe central Africa,
but certainly not USA.

What you write would essentially mean GPL (and any other such licence)
is invalid in the USA.

The licence is basically a promise not to sue. It wouldn't make any
sense to promise if you could revoke at will.

quoted text
> Ah, see - in the US the license(s) in question (and licenses in general) are 
> grants of rights, not a "statements of will".

Right here grants of rights are some sort of statements of will.

quoted text
> (Truthfully, in the US a license 
> should be read with an implicit "All rights reserved")

Actually (and I think it's the same in the USA), a copyrighted work
has an implicit "all rights reserved". A licence is just exception.
-- 
Krzysztof Halasa
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/