On Thu, 9 Sep 2004 13:31:40 -0400, Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Thu, Sep 09, 2004 at 05:03:24AM -0700, Josh Triplett wrote: (...) > > > 4. Your Author's Rights > > > > > > The object of this license is not to deny your author's rights on your > > > contribution. By choosing to contribute to the evolution of this work of > > > art, you only agree to give to others the same rights with regard to > > > your contribution as those which were granted to you by this license. > > > > This is starting to tie into one oddity with the license: when you > > distribute a modified version, you are not actually licensing your > > modifications under this license, although you are granting all the > > _rights_ in the license; as stated in clause 7, all licenses come from > > the original author. > > (I'm not sure what "rights" means with respect to copyright law; I'm > assuming it means "permissions" here, even though that's not what it means > to me, since nothing else seems to make sense.) > > This doesn't make sense. In granting rights (permission) to do something, > you're granting a license to do it.
I think "author's rights" refers to something also called "moral rights" (droit moral). Author's rights is somewhat unimplemented in US copyright law but present French law, which is the choice of law for this license. They are basically inalienable rights of an author not to be misrepresented or have his expression through the licensed work distorted with respect to the licensed work. A quick Google produced this, which presents a view on author's rights with regard to US copyright law: http://www.rbs2.com/moral.htm -- Patrick
