On 2004-04-22 00:08:31 +0100 Sam Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>>> "Jacobo" == Jacobo Tarrio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Jacobo> O Martes, 20 de Abril de 2004 ás 13:52:19 -0700, Jake Appelbaum > escribía: > Jacobo> Let this be my first try at a license analysis in d-l :) > >> 5. In all other respects the GPL 2.0 applies > > Jacobo> Oh, a nonconsistent license (places additional restrictions on > the GPL, > Jacobo> fine for the original author but not for would-be distributors of > the work), > Jacobo> thus undistributable. > > No, I think this is consistent, just GPL incompatible and non-free. > He's saying that his license is the GPL with the provided differences > applied. He can do that; he is not violating the GPL's copyright by > modifying it and he is allowed to make these license restrictions > although they may not all be enforcable.
Again, you open with disagreement and then restate the PP's view. He (the original author) can do that, but redistributors have to abide by the GPL which says "Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." Unless you want to argue that "these terms and conditions" are not the GPL's ones (and I think that is a Chewbacca defence), this is non-distributable by anyone besides the copyright holder because they cannot satisfy both the GPL and the extra conditions. -- MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know. Please http://remember.to/edit_messages on lists to be sure I read http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ gopher://g.towers.org.uk/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Creative copyleft computing services via http://www.ttllp.co.uk/
