[Foundation-l] Re-licensing

[Mike Godwin]

Anthony writes:

>> So, online but on a different server is okay, but online when there's
>> an offline copy isn't?
>
>
> Online when there's an offline copy clearly isn't okay.

Clearly because you have a legal right that distinguishes between  
online copies and offline copies?  Please explain. (Once again, I'm  
asking about legal rights because you claim to be basing your  
objections on your rights.)

>> What is the legal distinction you're drawing
>> here? (I ask for the "legal distinction" because you are articulating
>> your concern in terms of what you purport to be violations of your
>> legal rights.)
>>
>
> Actually, I'm purporting them to be violations of my moral rights.

How are you distinguishing between "moral rights" and "legal rights"?   
A moral right is a kind of legal right, in those jurisdictions that  
recognize moral rights.


> But the
> distinction is pretty obvious - in one case the page is a click  
> away, in the
> other case it at least requires finding internet access and typing  
> in a url,
> and quite possibly requires jumping through even more hoops than that.

So if you were unhappy that your attribution was at the back of a  
book, because a reader has to turn to the end and read through a lot  
of small print in order to find your name, that would give you a basis  
for objecting to that form of attribution?

> Additionally, printed copies will almost surely last longer than the  
> url
> remains accessible.  With online copies, the url can be updated if  
> it moves,
> or the page can be copied to the local server if the remote one goes  
> down.

Thank you for articulating an advantage to using URLs. The advantage  
of course applies both to online and offline copies.

>> But an online attribution on a separate page (or server) when the  
>> article is offline is *not*
>> "direct"?  What is the legal (or "rights") basis for this  
>> distinction?
>
> Common sense?

So you're saying your legal rights are defined by "common sense"? Are  
you sure that's the direction in which you want to take your argument?


--Mike