In a message dated: Wed, 30 May 2001 13:57:35 EDT
"Tony Lambiris" said:
>> Since the Linux kernel is GPL'd, there isn't really any chance of the
>> firewalling code being taken out. The user-space programs might be in
>> danger of relicensing, but most of those are GPL'd as well. This is
>> where the GPL, IMHO, is better than the BSD license. It specifically
>
>How is it better? The fact is, the license was changed. It has nothing to do
>with GPL vs BSD.
It's better because the kernel itself was GPL'ed which dictates that
any *derivative* work therefore also falls under the GPL. No one can
just change the license on ip[fwadm|chains|tables] even
retroactively, since the GPL clearly states:
0. This License applies to any program or other work which contains
a notice placed by the copyright holder saying it may be distributed
under the terms of this General Public License. The "Program", below,
refers to any such program or work, and a "work based on the Program"
means either the Program or any derivative work under copyright law:
that is to say, a work containing the Program or a portion of it,
either verbatim or with modifications and/or translated into another
language.
Essentially this states that once it's out there, it's out there, and
not even the original author can make non-free once you've made it
free. The Berkeley License/Copyright seems to infer the same, that
once it's been released under that license, it's out there. I don't
think, legally, according to the license, that even the original
author can recall an old/previously released version which fell under
the Berkeley license. (Yes, I know he's claiming to be doing just
this, but I don't think he can).
My understanding is that he's changed the license, and that can only
apply to all versions of the software *from this point on*!
Therefore, in order to "recall" previous versions, he'd have to get
each and every copy of all previous versions and re-distribute them
with the new license. That is just physically impossible, and I
doubt that if he were to take someone to court over using a previous
release in violation of the new license, he'd loose. But, IANAL!
None of this matters with the GPL, since you can't revoke. It
specifically states that all derivative works are protected.
Therefore, even if the people who wrote ip[fwadm|chains|tables]
wanted to revoke the GPL, they couldn't, since any future code they
wrote based on the previous work would be covered under the GPL as a
derivative work. Of course they could branch off and write
non-GPL'ed code based on the original and only release binaries and
maybe no one would know, but that's really not revoking the old
license, that's just violating the GPL. The old code is still out
there, and others will continue to work on it under the GPL.
--
Seeya,
Paul
----
It may look like I'm just sitting here doing nothing,
but I'm really actively waiting for all my problems to go away.
If you're not having fun, you're not doing it right!
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
