Hi,

Somebody asked me an interesting question, and I have no clue as to what the answer is.

If a software developer released source code as MPL. Then the author died, due to unforeseen circumstances, does that MPL still apply to that released source code? ie: Can somebody else take that source code, and create derivative works using a new licence? After all, the original licensing holder doesn't exist anymore.

Regards,
- Graeme -

It depends on the country, check this list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries'_copyright_length

The usual answer is: No, you need to wait 50 or 70 years more.

The answer is Yes only for Afghanistan and Marshal Islands

Op 2011-02-24 12:16, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho het geskryf:

It depends on the country, check this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries'_copyright_length

Thank you for that information. Interesting indeed. :)

Regards,
- Graeme -

Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote

It depends on the country, check this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries'_copyright_length The usual answer is: No, you need to wait 50 or 70 years more.

So if the author released under the MPL, it will stay MPL. At least for 50 years... (Then it will become public domain, or the rules that in your country)

Joost.

Joost van der Sluis wrote

So if the author released under the MPL, it will stay MPL. At least for 50 years... (Then it will become public domain, or the rules that in your country)

But you can make an agreement with heirs to change the license. If the author had no heirs you are doomed.

2011/2/24 Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho :

Then, having a patent on the software would be less limiting...only 20 years from that date of disclosure....
:-)

R#

It depends on the country, check this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries'_copyright_length

The "life + X" clearly indicates that the rights will fall to some inheritor - else it wouldn't make any legal sense. The X is big enough to make it a problem of our children, which most probably will have no use for such old things.

The X=0 case is very unlikely to matter, except when you intend to kill the author in order to make its work free of rights. [Life can be very short in Afghanistan ;-]

A license will continue to be valid, for the copy somebody got under that license. Otherwise search for possible inheritors and ask them for their conditions.

Just my 0.02? - IANAL.

DoDi

IIRC (at least) on US law only the copyright holder can file an infrigent lawsuit, so if there's no heirs the 'work' essentially falls on public domain?

-Fl?vio

IIRC (at least) on US law only the copyright holder can file an infrigent lawsuit, so if there's no heirs the 'work' essentially falls on public domain?

Yes, if...

DoDi

2011/2/24 Fl?vio Etrusco :

IIRC (at least) on US law only the copyright holder can file an infrigent lawsuit,

In Brazil too

Reading this I wonder how "heirs" are defined in this context. Do cousins count? Second cousins? Third
degree cousins?

Hello Lazarus-List,

Friday, February 25, 2011, 1:16:46 PM, you wrote:

Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote

> 2011/2/24 Fl?vio Etrusco : > > IIRC (at least) on US law only the copyright holder can file an > > infrigent lawsuit, > In Brazil too

MvdV> Reading this I wonder how "heirs" are defined in this context. MvdV> Do cousins count? Second cousins? Third
MvdV> degree cousins?

And, by default, finally the government.

If it is not a first order relative (siblings, parents, children), then
afaik there is already a 30 or 40% tax here.

I think that heritage is a legal act in every country, with fixed rules. Unless stated otherwise by the law, the author is free to nominate the heir of his work.

DoDi

Hello Lazarus-List,

you wrote

> MvdV> Reading this I wonder how "heirs" are defined in this context. > MvdV> Do cousins count? Second cousins? Third > MvdV> degree cousins? > And, by default, finally the government.

MvdV> If it is not a first order relative (siblings, parents, children), then
MvdV> afaik there is already a 30 or 40% tax here.

Are we talking about copyright ? A copyright by itself does not have any kind of taxes because it is not monetizable. The tax is applied over the commercial value of the copyrighted material (contable value, if it is the right word in english) and in all this cases are zero.

PS: I'm not a lawyer or finantial expert.

Hello Lazarus-List,

you wrote

> Are we talking about copyright ?

MvdV> No, we are talking about inheritance in general. But it was more meant as an MvdV> illustration that the definition of "heir" can vary in law and common speak.

In Spain and I think in almost all Europe, the blood line level influence the amount of taxes (taking blood line as an "in law" inclusive) but the rights are not finished at a defined level, as far away, less chances to reclaim something.

The first three levels are somehow direct candicates while far away levels must present a "complaint" (I'm not sure about the word) and if no people is presented with closer level he/she can reclaim something. Same rules are applied (more or less) when the there is somthing like a house but legal titular is not localizable, so heirs can reclaim the possesion but before they must "complaint" in a court. This kind of processes are usually very, very slow and can take up much more than the "legal" 3 years.