Date: Tue, 03 Jul 2001 13:18:58 -0600 From: Wes Peters <wes@dobox.com> To: j mckitrick <jcm@FreeBSD-uk.eu.org> Cc: Wes Peters <wes@softweyr.com>, Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in>, Giorgos Keramidas <keramida@ceid.upatras.gr>, Dirk Myers <dirkm@teleport.com>, freebsd-advocacy@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD, .Net comments - any reponse to this reasoning? Message-ID: <3B421AA2.6AA4A80D@dobox.com> References: <20010630173455.T344@teleport.com> <20010701032900.A93049@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20010701132353.W344@teleport.com> <20010702152649.A18127@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20010702180222.A2667@hades.hell.gr> <20010702161055.A18543@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20010702172448.I4896@lpt.ens.fr> <3B41F0E4.B55E6937@softweyr.com> <20010703172216.F39318@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org> <20010703.12235600@star.dobox.com> <20010703195732.A42423@dogma.freebsd-uk.eu.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
j mckitrick wrote:
>
> | > Does this mean the existing code does or does NOT continue to be under
> | the
> | > terms of the original license before it was changed?
> |
> | You can only change the license terms if all parties agree. You seem to
> | be completely and utterly misunderstanding the entire conversation here.
>
> I think I know what threw me off. It was the whole concept of why the FSF
> wants to be copyright holder. IIUC *now*, this is to make sure no one
> changes the license from the GPL, correct? Since there are no other
> copyright owners in this case, this is a given. FSF code will always
> remain under the GPL license, then.
Under *some* GPL, then. It does give them carte-blanche to move code to
newer, more restrictive licenses and to stop *their* maintenance of the
older code. It does not allow them to take existing code distributed
under GPL v2 or GPL v1 "off the market," but I doubt such code will last
for long without the ongoing support of the FSF, or the GNU project.
> Isn't one of the arguments of the GPL that the author *could* make their GPL
> code available under separate license for proprietary use?
Yes, and they occasionally do. Most will bark if you wave enough money at
them. I strongly suspect the FSF won't.
> | (please forgive any formatting bogons, I'm trying out a new mailer.)
>
> Which one?
StarOffice. It does work with IMAP-SSL, but the user interface is glacial.
(Big surprise).
--
Boats love me
Sails fear me
Wes Peters <wes@dobox.com> System Architect
http://www.dobox.com/ DoBox Inc.
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-advocacy" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3B421AA2.6AA4A80D>