3 ms·
1) If an author did not grant license to his code, then nobody can use it, by default, according to copyright law. 2) If an author did grant license to his cod
by drran 5y ago
1) If an author did not grant license to his code, then nobody can use it, by default, according to copyright law.
2) If an author did grant license to his code, then somebody, but not anybody, can use the code according to license.
3) If a somebody refuses to comply with license, then he permanently loses the right to use the code under such license, so then see (1).
- Hamuko 5y agoCompliance with the license is not necessary if it's actually Fair Use. >In its most general sense, a fair use is any copying of copyrighted material done for a limited and “transformative” purpose, such as to comment upon, criticize, or parody a copyrighted work. Such uses can be done without permission from the copyright owner. https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-use/ https://fairuse.stanford.edu/overview/fair-use/what-is-fair-...
- syshum 5y ago>> If an author did not grant license to his code, then nobody can use it, by default, according to copyright law. this is false. Fair Use is not about the license, it is a set of exemptions from copyright. for example I do not need a license to reproduce and publish a snippet of book for the proposes of review / criticism. The author may not like what I have to say, and did not grant me a license but I certainly can use the snippet under copy right law. The Legal Experts of ML are relaying I believe on the "education" exemption in Fair use for their "training of ML models is fair use". That will be an interesting case for sure