+-------[ Terry Lambert ]----------------------
| Andrew Kenneth Milton wrote:
| > There is unfortunately a section of the GPL community who confuses this
| > with the right to simply relicense BSDL code whenever you want, because it
| > doesn't explicitly deny it. The FSF 'GPL compatible' licenses page makes
| > this even more confusing (IMO).
| > 
| > If you want to stop your BSDL code being used in GPL projects (not sure
| > why you would want to), stick the advertising clause in, this then makes
| > the BSDL GPL incompatible (according to the FSF).
| The FSF is wrong on "compatible".

They're only right in one circumstance. Using whole slabs of BSDL code
standalone as part of the GPL project, i.e. no mixing of code, the GPL
forbids that (since you can't relicense other people's code).

| No matter what license is on the code, relicensing it
| under a different license without the author's written
| permission is not legal.

Relicensing isn't the same as incorporating into a larger work cf: Apple
OSX is not BSDL, but contains code that is. This is the situation under which
BSDL code is 'compatible' with the GPL (the license of the whole does not 
breech any conditions of the license of the parts).

If you were to get your hands on the OSX code, you could safely and legally
distribute the BSDL portions under the BSDL. Same with any GPL project using
BSDL code.

I don't think the GPL actually permits this either, but, the FSF are the ones
who tell you what your interpretation of their license is to be.

Totally Holistic Enterprises Internet|                      | Andrew Milton
The Internet (Aust) Pty Ltd          |                      |
ACN: 082 081 472 ABN: 83 082 081 472 |  M:+61 416 022 411   | Carpe Daemon
PO Box 837 Indooroopilly QLD 4068    |[EMAIL PROTECTED]| 

To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message

Reply via email to