Licence: Difference between revisions
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
Amwelladmin (talk | contribs) No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{g}}A [[contract]]ual permission granted by the owner of a right, or item of property to another person to use that property or exercise that right. This might be an [[exclusive licence]] (as with a physical item — only one person can use it at a time) or ''non''-exclusive (as with [[intellectual property]], where many people can share the right without upsetting each other). | {{g}}A [[contract]]ual permission granted by the owner of a right, or item of property to another person to use that property or exercise that right. This might be an [[exclusive licence]] (as with a physical item — only one person can use it at a time) or ''non''-exclusive (as with [[intellectual property]], where many people can share the right without upsetting each other). | ||
===Treatment in contemporary<ref>Call me grand-dad ok? Contemporary for ME.</ref> pop music of=== | |||
Discussed in that great legal monograph, Billy Idol’s ''[[Rebel Yell]]'', in the context of a “[[licence]] for love” — | Discussed in that great legal monograph, Billy Idol’s ''[[Rebel Yell]]'', in the context of a “[[licence]] for love” — | ||
| Line 8: | Line 9: | ||
A [[licence for love]] of course ''usually'' is exclusive, but when it comes to rock stars, persons with whom they consort and persons who explicit tout the availability of their own love to whomsoever should hold such a “licence” [[for the time being]] possibly not so much<ref>Then again, one ''can'' exclusively licence one’s “love”, for valuable [[consideration]], for a short period of time, so maybe not.</ref>. Kudos, too, to Mr. Idol for recognising the time value of the option, and bounding it with a discretionary expiration date. [[Black-Scholes]] would be proud. | A [[licence for love]] of course ''usually'' is exclusive, but when it comes to rock stars, persons with whom they consort and persons who explicit tout the availability of their own love to whomsoever should hold such a “licence” [[for the time being]] possibly not so much<ref>Then again, one ''can'' exclusively licence one’s “love”, for valuable [[consideration]], for a short period of time, so maybe not.</ref>. Kudos, too, to Mr. Idol for recognising the time value of the option, and bounding it with a discretionary expiration date. [[Black-Scholes]] would be proud. | ||
===[[Confidentiality agreement]]s=== | |||
So does entering a {{confiprov|confidentiality agreement}} involve any kind of licence to use the disclosed information? Not if your [[legal eagle]]s have conducted their review with any kind of acuity. | |||
{{linkedin|26/9/19}} | {{linkedin|26/9/19}} | ||
{{ref}} | {{ref}} | ||
Revision as of 19:55, 26 September 2019
|
|
A contractual permission granted by the owner of a right, or item of property to another person to use that property or exercise that right. This might be an exclusive licence (as with a physical item — only one person can use it at a time) or non-exclusive (as with intellectual property, where many people can share the right without upsetting each other).
Treatment in contemporary[1] pop music of
Discussed in that great legal monograph, Billy Idol’s Rebel Yell, in the context of a “licence for love” —
- She said, come on baby, I got a licence for love
- And if it expires, pray help from above —
A licence for love of course usually is exclusive, but when it comes to rock stars, persons with whom they consort and persons who explicit tout the availability of their own love to whomsoever should hold such a “licence” for the time being possibly not so much[2]. Kudos, too, to Mr. Idol for recognising the time value of the option, and bounding it with a discretionary expiration date. Black-Scholes would be proud.
Confidentiality agreements
So does entering a confidentiality agreement involve any kind of licence to use the disclosed information? Not if your legal eagles have conducted their review with any kind of acuity.
26/9/19
References
- ↑ Call me grand-dad ok? Contemporary for ME.
- ↑ Then again, one can exclusively licence one’s “love”, for valuable consideration, for a short period of time, so maybe not.