Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 14:35:19 -0600 From: Jacques Vidrine <n@nectar.com> To: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> Cc: chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Attempt to relicense BSD code under the GPL Message-ID: <199901182035.OAA01818@spawn.nectar.com> In-Reply-To: <4.1.19990118114510.0475fa90@mail.lariat.org> References: <4.1.19990118095621.04517460@mail.lariat.org> <4.1.19990118092136.0465ede0@mail.lariat.org> <4.1.19990118092136.0465ede0@mail.lariat.org> <4.1.19990118095621.04517460@mail.lariat.org> <4.1.19990118114510.0475fa90@mail.lariat.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 18 January 1999 at 11:55, Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> wrote: > Use the links, Luke. ;-) Follow the link with the text "Licensing > policy" midway down the page. It leads to the following: Yes, and that clearly states to see doc/licensing.tex for ``credits and exceptions''. [snip] > There's no mention of the fact that it is per se illegal to relicense > BSD code under the GPL. 1) See doc/licensing.tex. 2) Who in their right mind would think that they can change the license on a given piece of software if they have no copyright on the software? > >What is ``the COMPILATION copyright''? I don't follow. > > It's a basic concept of copyright law. When you compile a collection > of material, you own a copyright on the way the collection is compiled > (the selection of elements and the way in which they're linked together) > even if you don't own all of the component parts. Thanks, it is clear to me what you mean now. Again, this doesn't seem to cause any problems ... the various borrowed bits of software still retain their original copyright. [snip] > >The code developed at Univ. of Utah, the OSKit proper, if you will, > >is under GPL (although note that other licensing terms are available). > > It should not be. This is contrary to the stated purpose of the project. > How can one reduce the cost of OS R&D when one precludes businesses > from creating commercial OSes based on the kit? I'm not disagreeing with you on this point. I advocate BSD-like licenses over GPL. It is the University's perogative to license its software as it sees fit, however. It is also tangential to the subject of this thread: ``Attempt to relicense BSD code under the GPL'' -- a subject which I still say is bogus in this case. There has been no attempt by the project to ``relicense BSD code under the GPL''. > >The code donated/borrowed from other projects, such as FreeBSD, are > >still under the original copyright of the project (of course, since > >that cannot legally be changed). > > That's not what that "License policy" says. This group is attempting to > relicense BSD-licensed code under the GPL, both by stamping the GPL > on it and by using it for the package as a whole. That _is_ what it says. Read. Show me where it says that, e.g., the FreeBSD C library is under GPL. Jacques Vidrine / n@nectar.com / nectar@FreeBSD.org To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199901182035.OAA01818>