Andrew Smith wrote:
http://www.openbsd.org/policy.html
Scroll down to the section 'Permissions - the flip side' and consider the
consequences of the statements in paragraph 4.
This section is probably the biggest one that supports my view that GPL
cannot be recinded and after initiation and that all GPL code should be
carefully considered with regard to future use in GPL environments even by
the original author.
I am open to having that view changed if you have a more definitive source
of reference, however, it may well be the case that some of the flexibility
that may be present in under one regional boundary isn't present in another
region. To this end many licenses state that the licensing terms are in
accordance with 'California state law..' or whatever, by accepting the terms
you are therefore reducing ambiguity on the use of the license.
"Rescind" and "revoke" are not the issue here. These are straw men.
The original author(s) can *also* offer their works under *other*
licenses in *addition*. There's a long history of copyrighted work
licensed under multiple, concurrent, non-exclusive licenses.
That's easiest if it's always been done that way for a given work, or if
there's a single author to make the decision without consulting anyone
else. This isn't practical (or even possible) for projects with hundreds
or thousands of contributors, but it's very possible for projects with a
small number of contributors. Asking won't hurt. Some will be adamant
about being GPL only. Others really won't mind offering it under a BSD
license as well.
--
Darrin Chandler | Phoenix BSD Users Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http://bsd.phoenix.az.us/
http://www.stilyagin.com/ |
