On Tue, Mar 27, 2012 at 10:12 AM, Gabriel Kerneis <[email protected]> wrote:
> IANAL, but I fail to see how someone who is *not* the copyright holder might > have any right to add restrictions whatsoever on a piece of code. Only the > copyright holder can decide the licence of their code. > > And if the additional GPL headers do not apply to Juliusz's and Matthieu's > code, > then what do they apply to and what is the point in adding them? The primary reason for using MIT/X11/BSD is precisely to allow others to *relicense* the code as they wish. Thus, I can take pieces (whole or in part) into my closed projects, licensed commercially. Or, into my GPL projects, licensed under GPLv3. If you do not want to offer people this freedom, simply use a more precise license. But you cannot (this is weirdly ironic) try to grant specific freedoms to commercial software developers but not to free software developers. You could of course write a license saying, "this software can be used in any project except a GPL one" and that'd be entirely legal. You are after all the copyright holder. You can restrict relicensing of your code. But you cannot change your mind *after* you have granted a license to the world on your code. -Pieter _______________________________________________ Babel-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/babel-users
