Glenn Maynard wrote: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 11:18:26PM +0100, Bram Moolenaar wrote: > > Theoretically this would be possible. However, for the software to be > > distributed with another license every person that contributed would have > > to agree with it, since each person has the copyright for the part he > > contributed under the GPL. Since there hardly ever is an explicit > > mentioning of what license is used for the contributed part, implicitly > > the currently active license applies. Well, I'm not a lawyer but that's > > how I interpret what I heard (it might actually be different for various > > countries). > > Wouldn't this apply to you changing the license *at all*? (For example, > removing the "send-changes-upstream" clause.)
Only when the intention of the license changes. So far I have only changed the wording. I do send the new text to the vim-dev maillist so that others can say what they think. If I add the option to distribute sources with a modified version, this is a real change and I need to find out if there is anybody who objects to it. > By the way, are you subscribed to debian-legal? You're getting dropped > from some CCs in subthreads. No, I'm not in debian-legal. -- Q: How does a UNIX Guru do Sex ? A: unzip;strip;touch;finger;mount;fsck;more;yes;umount;sleep /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.moolenaar.net \\\ ((( Creator of Vim -- http://vim.sf.net -- ftp://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim ))) \\\ Help me helping AIDS orphans in Uganda - http://iccf-holland.org ///