Volker Kuhlmann wrote: > > no, the license can always be changed by those who own the code. > > you can even use multiple licenses at once. > > the only ones bound to the license are those that do not own the code. > > That may be true, but I was under the impression the the GPL was > irrevocable? This would help considerably with safeguarding any investment > made into the software.
The way it was explained to me a while ago boiled down to the following: 1. You own the code to begin with. 2. When applying a GPL, the code tree basically splits. The GPL version is irrevocably GPL, as are any descendants. The other branch is still yours to do with as you please. 3. Transferring code from the GPL version into the non-GPL version taints the latter into being GPL. So, in order to have both a GPL and a non-GPL version of the code, you split the tree and maintain both separately. Ideally, changes would be made to the commercial version and then transferred into the GPL (rather than the other way 'round). In particular, once it's GPL'ed (and especially once other people have modified it under GPL), no single person owns the code any more. (Comment: this would make maintaining GPL and commercial versions concurrently when other people are also modifying it a real pain.) That sound about right? Theuns KRN
