It is borderline impossible to change to a non-GPL license, the reason
being that all additions to the code are in principle copyright of the
person who added the code. That means that we would need to have
acceptance of all authors, or take their contributions out, before we
could change the license.
There is a legal department in GNU that can take these issues up if you
would like to pursue them.
mvh Christian.
On 12/22/2011 01:02 PM, Michael Petch wrote:
On the subject of GPL violations. There is a level of apathy with
regards to our license. The last time out that I saw that there was a
clear violation of our license (years ago), it was shrugged off by
members on the team.
GNUBG is at the heart of a Yahoo and Pogo Cheat (Backgammon Buddy)
program sold for 19.99 (And has been around for MANY years). When I
queried the author numerous times for the source code (From differing
email addresses) they refused.
I know about this transgression but I'm unsure if the authors of this
product care anymore about this license. I can understand some of the
apathy, in that some may feel that it isn't worth the effort to enforce it.
So my question is this. Should GNUBG consider a different more liberal
license, or a dual license structure? This IMHO would be something Gary
would likely have final say on.
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnubg mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
