On Fri, 6 Dec 2002, Arkady V.Belousov wrote: > BO> If I write software under license A and B and then license A says: this > BO> code may not be released under any other license, then I would be > BO> contradicting myself (hence, a fairly technical issue, sue yourself!). > > But any commercial license (which restricts distribution) contradicts > to GPL!
only for non-full-copyright holders, unless the software was dual (or more)-licensed from the start. AOL/Netscape is allowed to release closed-source versions of Netscape but a large part of Netscape is Mozilla, where Mozilla is triple-licensed under the NPL, MPL, and LGPL. Similar for Sun with StarOffice and OpenOffice (SISSL/(L)GPL). And Pat Villani had a commercial (better said, proprietary) predecessor of the FreeDOS kernel which he, if he wants, can still treat as such. However all of my, Tom's, ror4's, James Tabor, ... changes are under the GPL, and we, as individuals, are not allowed to change the license of the FreeDOS kernel as a whole. Neither can Pat take those changes and make them proprietary. Bart ---------- list options/archives/etc.: http://www.topica.com/lists/fd-dev unsubscribe: send blank email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ==^================================================================ This email was sent to: [email protected] EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Rv5.bbRv4l.YXJjaGl2 Or send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail! http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register ==^================================================================
