On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 4:17 AM, Graham Percival <gra...@percival-music.ca> wrote: > I think you are wrong. I think that this Margaret person has > created works that are under copyright, and you are taking those > works and claiming to offer them under a license that she did not > consent to. >
Actually no. A license is (in part) a promise that the licensor will not sue the licensee so long as s/he adheres to the terms of the license. The licenses I offer, by law, can apply only to whatever portions of the work are my original contributions. Margaret's rights are not abrogated in any way by a license between me and someone who downloads one of the files from Solfege Resources. She or her heirs and assigns could still go after someone anyone who uses the files for financial profit. I'm merely promising that I won't go after them with regard to my work. Moreover, I have diligently acknowledged Margaret's work and urged users to respect her terms of use despite that fact that there is, under U.S. law as I understand it, reason to doubt that what's in my files (sequences of pitches and rhythms) are anything other than minor alterations of music already in the public domain. Cheers, Mike _______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
