From owner-freebsd-chat  Tue Feb 18 01:34:37 1997
Return-Path: <owner-chat>
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id BAA21012
          for chat-outgoing; Tue, 18 Feb 1997 01:34:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from narcissus.ml.org (root@brosenga.Pitzer.edu [134.173.120.201])
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id BAA21003
          for <chat@freebsd.org>; Tue, 18 Feb 1997 01:34:32 -0800 (PST)
Received: (from ben@localhost) by narcissus.ml.org (8.7.5/8.7.3) id BAA01802; Tue, 18 Feb 1997 01:34:29 -0800 (PST)
Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 01:34:29 -0800 (PST)
From: Snob Art Genre <ben@narcissus.ml.org>
To: "David O'Brien" <obrien@NUXI.com>
cc: chat@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: GPL
In-Reply-To: <19970217235135.LP40831@dragon.nuxi.com>
Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970218013345.1767A-100000@narcissus.ml.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: owner-chat@freebsd.org
X-Loop: FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, 17 Feb 1997, David O'Brien wrote:

> > The major complaint is that it restricts the use of the software
> > extensively.  You cannot, for instance, distribute binary-only copies of
> > GPL'ed software.  Nor can you sell derivative works of GPL'ed software.
> 
> Here is a [real life] question for you.
> Say someone has written fooquix and from version 0.01 to 0.49 it was
> GPL'ed.  Then they decided they wanted to make some $$$ from it.  So the
> next release (say 0.50) was binary only.  Now obiviously 0.50 is derived
> work based on the GPL'ed code of 0.49.
> 
> Is this allowable, or once software is under GLP it stays there?

It's allowable, because you, as the author of the GPL'd code, have the 
right to release yourself from the GPL, I believe.
 
> -- 
> -- David	(obrien@NUXI.com  -or-  obrien@FreeBSD.org)
> 



 Ben

"You have your mind on computers, it seems."