Previous Next Index Thread
Previous Next Index Thread
CYBERSPACE LAW FOR NON-LAWYERS
Cyberspace-Law # 7 and # 8, covering Copyright 6 & 7
--------------------------------------------------
Topic: COPYRIGHT 6: IMPLIED LICENSE
Email number: 7
Date Posted: June 14, 1996, 6:40pm EDT
COPYRIGHT 6: A COPYRIGHT OWNER'S CONDUCT
MAY *SOMETIMES* CREATE AN
"IMPLIED LICENSE" THAT LETS
OTHERS COPY
You post something to a discussion list. I quote your message
in my response. Have I acted illegally?
Probably not, though your message is copyrighted, and I copied
it. Your posting the message to a discussion list almost certainly
gives others an "implied license" to quote it. When a copyright
owner acts in such a way that *reasonable people would
assume that he's allowing them to make copies*, the law interprets
his conduct as creating an "implied license."
A familiar non-cyber example is a letter to the editor. If I send
the letter to the newspaper that starts with "Dear Mr. Editor," a
reasonable person would assume that I'm allowing them to publish.
This is so because this is a *customary practice*, and because almost
everyone knows about this custom. So when the newspaper
publishes the letter, they'll be protected by the implied license.
A few more examples:
* Someone sends a personal message to one other person.
Reasonable people would generally not assume that the
author is allowing the recipient to forward the message
to others. NO IMPLIED LICENSE.
* A newspaper posts something on its advertising-
supported Web page. Reasonable people probably
wouldn't assume that it's allowing readers to forward it
to news groups. PROBABLY NO IMPLIED LICENSE.
* Someone sends a message to a discussion list. It's not
clear whether reasonable people would assume that
they're allowed to forward it to other lists. A lot might
depend on the list's customs, and on whether the list is
wide open or limited to only a few people.
It should be clear by now that this is a VERY mushy test (a lot
of law is, for better or worse, that way). Fortunately, though,
you as the copyright owner can make things less mushy:
Implied licenses can always be EXPRESSLY REVOKED, just
by saying so in a way that potential copiers will see.
If my letter to the newspaper starts with "Dear Editor: Don't
publish this," then I'm not giving the newspaper any sort of license.
Similarly, if my e-mail to a discussion group clearly says "Don't
forward this to any other group," readers won't have an implied
license to forward it. If I were the lawyer for a newspaper that
didn't want its stories copied from its Web page, I'd tell them to
put up a prominent notice about this.
One more important point: An implied license can only be
granted by the COPYRIGHT OWNER. If I post someone else's
software (or even someone else's newspaper article) to a
bulletin board, this doesn't give anyone the implied license to
do anything with it.
----------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------
CYBERSPACE LAW FOR NON-LAWYERS