New Open Source License: Single Supplier Open Source License

[Rahul Siddharthan]

Gary W. Swearingen wrote:
[context: making private modifications to GPL code]
> > You don't require its permission for that.  If you legally have a copy
> > of it, you can do what you like to it, just as if you legally
> > purchased a book, you may scribble on its margins.
> 
> You are wrong.  If you legally have a copy of it, you can do what you
> agreed to do with it, else you've violated your copyright license
> agreement to copy, derive, and/or and publish.

Do you have any evidence for this -- a law, or a precedent case?
You'll find citations to the contrary (law, and legal precedent) in
the DJB link I sent earlier (http://cr.yp.to/softwarelaw.html).

Copyright law deals with copying.  It does not deal with modification.
It is just as legal to modify software you own and have paid for, as
it is to modify a book you own, as long as you don't plan to make
additional copies.  

There are also substantial fair-use rights that allow making copies
for some purposes; see http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.html
(for works of art) and http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/117.html
(for computer programs).  This applies to commercial software too, but
the GPL allows unrestricted reproduction for personal use, so the
above items aren't relevant.

It is true that laws have recently been passed that substantially
infringe on fair use (eg, the DMCA), but I'm not aware of any laws
that impact the GPL or this issue.  It is also true that corporations
try to get around the fair-use problem by imposing click-through
agreements to take away your rights; it is not clear to what extent
these things are legally valid.  And again, the GPL does not do this:
it is a license covering redistribution *only*, not use.  It is not a
mutual agreement or a contract; at no stage are you asked to agree to
anything before using the software.  You can take it (and the rights
it gives you to distribute) or leave it (no right to distribute) but
it does not change your existing rights.  Do not confuse click-through
agreements with free software licenses.

So, if you believe that you can't legally modify code for private use
unless the GPL explicitly permits you to do so: explain why you think
so, with evidence, please.

> I've read more than enough about copyright law and software licenses
> and the GPL to not appreciate people treating me like an ignoramus.

Tough.  Next time, try backing up your arguments with something more
than emotion.

Rahul