IANAL - but the following makes sense to me.
If all licenses were
built equally and had a clause that said:
If you breach this license, the
license is automatically revoked!
Then... maybe yes it would become a
copyright violation, maybe no.
Did you - as the breacher of the license -
immediately stop any activities granted by the license which would otherwise not
be allowed by Copyright Law? If you did - in other words, when you were at a
point of not being licensed to copy and distribute, you did not copy and
distribute - then I'd say you're only in breach of the license and not copyright
If you continued such activities - then you were in both breach of
the license as well as breach of copyright law.
Change the license so it
doesn't have that automatic revoke and instead carries other forms of
compensation for the breach - Copyright Law is not in breach.
See what I
mean? Answer: It Depends!
Isn't any license violation really a
Such a statement really doesn't account for
exceptions (if they're not the norm) and as a result it becomes a global
statement. And global statements are rarely every true.
No... I don't j-walk. As I'm a member of that unit refered to
as "everyone", the statement is automatically false!
[ Reply to This | Parent | # ]