How is granting a nonexclusive license to MIT compatible with MIT being able to exercise ‘all rights under copyright’?
The legal framework for copyright is that you can’t give away what you don’t have. MIT will have been granted nonexclusive rights, and will not be able in turn to grant exclusive rights. MIT, however, will be able to exercise all of the other rights under copyright, including reproducing, displaying, distributing, and making derivative works of articles covered by the policy, as long as these activities are not done for profit.
Related Questions
- How is granting a nonexclusive license to MIT compatible with MIT being able to exercise ‘all rights under copyright’? Don’t those rights include the right to grant exclusive rights?
- Why didn you just relicense the Mozilla code under a non-copyleft license (like the MIT or BSD licenses) that would be compatible with all other possible licenses?
- How is granting a nonexclusive license to MIT compatible with MIT being able to exercise ‘all rights under copyright’?
