Roy T. Fielding scripsit: > "Code incorporating patents, when the code and contributors' patents are > licensed solely under the MIT license, cannot be incorporated into a > derivative work distributed under GPLv2, because any recipient who > receives a copy of such a derivative work has no rights to use any of > the patents incorporated into the original MIT code." > > Why, then, is the MIT license compatible with the GPL?
Because the MIT license is silent about patents; in and of itself, it can't do anything to require you to breach the GPL's licensing terms. (It may be that the word "use" provides an implied patent license.) A specific MIT-licensed program may be GPL-incompatible, but MIT-licensed programs as a class are not, because they don't impose any requirements incompatible with the GPL's. -- Where the wombat has walked, John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> it will inevitably walk again. http://www.ccil.org/~cowan -- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3