On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 12:43 AM, Ricardo Palomares Martínez <[email protected]> wrote: > However, I've just realized, while talking to Cédric apropos KompoZer > dictionaries page, that currently, the Spanish dictionary is > tri-licensed under GPLv3, LGPLv3 and MPL1.1. > > I've seen in Mozilla Code Licensing page (http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/) > that the tri-license is described as "GPLv2 or later" and "LGPLv2.1 or > later" (besided MPL1.1, of course). > > The question is: does that qualify to include it in Mozilla (or, for > that matter, KompoZer) localized binaries? Or is mandatory that the > dictionary is licensed under GPLv2 & LGPLv2.1?
I don't speak for mozilla (or my employer, or even myself, and I am not a lawyer), but GPL3 and friends are not compatible w/ GPL2 and friends. When we offer tri licensing, we require everything to be friendly to all 3 licenses, a GPL3-tri would fail that requirement. A binary distribution can of course use a single license which satisfies all requirements of its constituent parts. However, historically, when we have picked a custom license for binaries people have yelled and screamed (I certain would be annoyed if you distributed a Gecko under GPL3 because if you have any edits in it, i couldn't take them and put them back into upstream). _______________________________________________ legal mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/legal
