From owner-freebsd-chat Sun Apr 7 3:15:39 2002 Delivered-To: freebsd-chat@freebsd.org Received: from falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net (falcon.mail.pas.earthlink.net [207.217.120.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C85537B405 for ; Sun, 7 Apr 2002 03:15:32 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pool0107.cvx22-bradley.dialup.earthlink.net ([209.179.198.107] helo=mindspring.com) by falcon.prod.itd.earthlink.net with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1) id 16u9ho-0005YO-00; Sun, 07 Apr 2002 03:15:29 -0700 Message-ID: <3CB01C27.CA0B2600@mindspring.com> Date: Sun, 07 Apr 2002 03:15:03 -0700 From: Terry Lambert X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en]C-CCK-MCD {Sony} (Win98; U) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ian Pulsford Cc: freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Abuses of the BSD license? References: <200204051922.06556@silver.dt1.binity.net> <3CAE7037.801FB15F@optusnet.com.au> <3CAEA028.186ED53E@optusnet.com.au> <3CAED90B.F4B7905@mindspring.com> <3CAEFFAA.91525BB3@optusnet.com.au> <3CAF74A9.135485DA@mindspring.com> <3CAFA609.32DD89E4@optusnet.com.au> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: owner-freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk List-ID: List-Archive: (Web Archive) List-Help: (List Instructions) List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Ian Pulsford wrote: > But surely, strictly speaking, you can't? That is correct. I and many others have stated this opinion before. > Adding a license is not one a right you get automatically when you > get a piece of code. You can sublicense, depending on the original license of the code, and whther the new license permits the old license to remain, or requires that it be removed (in which case, you can not use the new license for the work itself, only for the aggregate (if there is one), or if the original author makes the change. > Actually I reread the GPL carefully a little while ago and I > am not convinced that you need to give everything distributed > with GPLed software a GPL. I think this is a misunderstanding > that has gotten out of control. Depends on what you mean by "with"... > In section 2 of the GPL: > > "These requirements apply to the modified work as a whole. If > identifiable sections of that work are not derived from the Program, and > can be reasonably considered independent and separate works in > themselves, then this License, and its terms, do not apply to those > sections when you distribute them as separate works. But when you *********************************************** > distribute the same sections as part of a whole which is a work based on > the Program, the distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this > License, whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire > whole, and thus to each and every part regardless of who wrote it." > > This doesn't say you have to give separate works the GPL license only > that you have to distribute it under the same terms while it is part of > a GPLed package. That's right. If they are part of the whole, then you must GPL all the parts. You introduce some reinterpretation when you use the word "package" here, since it could mean "a package which agregates seperate works"; the GPL specifically states that it doesn't apply to "mere aggregations" (last paragraph of section 2). Your introduced wording is not part of the GPL. -- Terry To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message