[OSM-legal-talk] Are CT contributors are in breach of the CC-BY-SA license?
fjmd1a at gmail.com
Mon Apr 18 08:09:03 BST 2011
On 18 April 2011 02:13, Anthony <osm at inbox.org> wrote:
> Presumably they would point out that the incorrect part of your
> reasoning is that "Re-distribution under a licence is sublicensing and
> cannot be anything else."
> Redistribution under a license is not sublicensing. I'm not even
> quite sure how you'd construe them to be the same. If I give you
> permission to (re)distribute my work under a license, I am not giving
> you permission to sublicense that work.
Obviously we mean different things by "sub-license". Can you explain
what you understand it to mean?
If X licenses a work to Y under licence L1 and Y licences the same
work to Z under licence L2 where Y's right to give L2 is given under
L1 then L2 is a sublicence of L1. That is the situation you are
describing. And that is (as I understand it) what "sublicence" means.
More information about the legal-talk