Roger Fujii wrote: > Now I'm confused. Are you saying there is no "fair use" when the target is > software? While one can weaken" fair use" via the license, is this a good > idea for OSI to support this?
Fair use always remains a legitimate defense to copyright infringement. But it is a poor basis for claiming rights to use and distribute software for commercial purposes. There are many limits to fair use that courts will analyze after you admit to infringement. It seldom results in forgiveness. /Larry From: License-discuss <license-discuss-boun...@lists.opensource.org> On Behalf Of Roger Fujii Sent: Thursday, August 22, 2019 10:17 PM To: license-discuss@lists.opensource.org Subject: Re: [License-discuss] For Public Comment: The Libre Source License On 8/21/2019 7:33 PM, Lawrence Rosen wrote: Russell, please clarify something for me about your opinion about copyright policy: Is any license whatsoever required in order for a private party to copy or modify a work of software, that it has obtained somehow, for her own private purposes? Or, in your view, is at least a minimal license required from the author to do those things? I assume, at least in the US under current law, that software (source code and binary) is copyrightable as a literary work. And therefore, such a copyright is valid also under Berne, even in Canada, despite your wish that software not be copyrightable for private use. How can anyone avoid a license for private uses? /Larry Now I'm confused. Are you saying there is no "fair use" when the target is software? While one can weaken"fair use" via the license, is this a good idea for OSI to support this? Roger Fujii
_______________________________________________ License-discuss mailing list License-discuss@lists.opensource.org http://lists.opensource.org/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss_lists.opensource.org
