yep. /LR > -----Original Message----- > From: John Cowan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, March 12, 2003 11:38 AM > To: Brian Behlendorf > Cc: Lawrence E. Rosen; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Compatibility of the AFL with the GPL > > > Brian Behlendorf scripsit: > > > But but... your AFL terms persist, so I'm not really relicensing. > > This new one-byte-different derivative work is *not* under > an Apache > > license - one who picks up that code and follows only the Apache > > license may find themselves violating your AFL license. > The license > > on my *modification* (that whole byte) may be Apache > licensed, but not > > the bits derived from your original work. > > Nope. The creator of a derivative work under license is the > copyright owner of the derivative work as a whole. He > cannot, of course, prevent other people from making > derivative works based on the same original, but he can > certainly defend his own copyright. > > This is why BSD-licensed code can be incorporated into > proprietary binary works, e.g. > > (IANAL, TINLA) > > -- > It was impossible to inveigle John Cowan > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel http://www.ccil.org/~cowan > Into offering the slightest apology http://www.reutershealth.com > For his Phenomenology. --W. H. Auden, > from "People" (1953) >
-- license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3
