Cc-au mailing list

[Nic Suzor <nic AT suzor.com>]

Hi Geoff,


Geoff Groube [Mon Sep 27, 2004 at 02:57:13PM +1000]:
> I take a look at the C# implementation 
> (http://workspaces.gotdotnet.com/cclib) and notice with some amuzement that 
> the project is being distributed under the LGPL (interesting), and that the 
> page this project is posted on has a Microsoft Copyright statement on it.  
> "Strange," I think.  "What terms do Microsoft put on something that has 
> been LGPLed and is intended for use with the CC license?"  The Terms of Use 
> page concerns me, particularly the clause under "NOTICE SPECIFIC TO 
> SOFTWARE AVAILABLE ON THIS WEB SITE.  Any software that is made available 
> to download from the Services ("Software") is the copyrighted work of 
> Microsoft, its suppliers and/or other registered users of the Services."
> 
> My concern is based around (what we in the software industry call) scope 
> and order of precedence rules.  If I'm offering a work under a license, 
> (say, any of the CC licenses), and it appears on a website carrying it's 
> own copyright (with terms of use that are not consistent with the terms of 
> my license), which license has precedence?

Generally, like overloading, the most specific licence will apply. In
this case, you can see that the software itself is licensed under the
LGPL. The copyright notice by Microsoft acts like a wrapper around the
whole site - they're basically trying to ensure that you're aware that
the content around the software is owned by Microsoft (the content and
design of the pages, graphics and everything else that isn't part of the
software itself). 

The terms of use statement forms part of Microsoft's terms for the
website - they are not terms for the software (otherwise they would be
in breach of the LGPL). If you look at the terms, they say "Use of the
Software is governed by the terms of the end user license agreement, if
any, which accompanies or is included with the Software ("License
Agreement")" (http://www.gotdotnet.com/workspaces/legal/tou.aspx). 

If a website removes the licence from a work you've made available under
a CC licence or GPL, then there is a problem. Likewise if they
misrepresent the licence that is applicable to the work. That is why the
terms of use are carefully worded ("Any software [...] is the copyrighted
work of Microsoft, its suppliers and/or other registered users of the 
Services"; "The Software is made available for download solely for use
by end users according to the License Agreement").

In summary, if a website owner takes a work of yours that is licenced
under an open licence, and removes that licence from your work, they
will be in breach of that licence. If it is clear that your work is
licensed under your open licence, however, there shouldn't be a problem.
The website can impose it's own conditions of use of the website itself,
but it cannot change the licence on your work. 

I hope that's clear - if you have any further questions, just let me
know.

Regards,


Nic Suzor
nic AT suzor.com
AU-CC Team