On Mar 23, 1:18 am, Marius Mårnes Mathiesen
<[email protected]> wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2011 at 3:08 PM, hyc <[email protected]> wrote:
> > I'm surprised this was passed over so lightly.  The text that Yuri
> > quoted from the Terms of Service means that users grant gitorious a
> > sublicense to the content. And yet, most of the free software licenses
> > prohibit sublicensing. This is a pretty glaring conflict, given the
> > huge amount of GPL code present on gitorious. E.g., GPLv3 states this
> > explicitly at the end of Section 2.
> >   Sublicensing is not allowed; section 10 makes it unnecessary.
> >http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html
>
> So is the issue here the text "(hereunder sub-licensing)", or are there
> other issues you're concerned about?
>
Sub-licensing, exactly.

-- 
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]

Reply via email to