Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:
David Kastrup wrote: [...]
http://www.lehrer-online.de/dyn/bin/366209-369076-1-uebertragung_von_nutzungsrechten.pdf
"Inhabern ausschließlicher Nutzungsrechte vorbehalten
Die Einräumung von Unternutzungsrechten ist allerdings dem
Inhaber eines ausschließlichen Nutzungsrechtes vorbehalten (§
31 Abs. 3 UrhG); einfache Nutzungsrechte berechtigen
demgegenüber nicht zur Einräumung von Unternutzungsrechten."
So where is the problem? It says that giving somebody "right to
use" is
Under the German copyright act ONLY EXCLUSIVE LICENSEES CAN
SUBLICENSE.
Wrong. You still don't get it. Exclusive licensees _automatically_
receive the right to sublicense. A non-exclusive licensee does not
_per_ _se_ have the right to sublicense. But if the license terms
_grant_ him sublicensing possibilities, he can certainly make use of
him.
You can license people to exercise almost any right you have, except
for _personal_ rights, those bound to the originator. Like the claim
of authorship.
For example, the MIT License
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php
"the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute,
sublicense,"
is VOID regarding sublicensing under the German law.
_Exactly_ because non-exclusive licensees do not get the right to
sublicense automatically, these terms are granting something which
the licensee otherwise could not do.
You are getting it backwards.