Hi Gerv, Thanks for the various remarks, this licensing stuff isn't my field. From what you've said, looks like my concerns are unfounded.
The truth of who owns what is messy enough to explain why there isn't a simple "this is all GPLed by X. The End" statement at the start. > What do you mean by "granting a license". (without wishing to extend a topic ad nauseum ...) In my simple world, a license is between a licensor and a licensee. It's a contract where the licensee gains rights, and the licensor gains money or some other form of recompense, such as a sales channel. "Licensing" is different to "gifting". Gifting is where you give something in return for nothing. But then I'm no lawyer and might have this totally wrong. Initially it seemed to me that the Mozilla arrangements were more like a gift from AOL (since no-one signed anything). That prompted my question "who transferred the IP?". Tranferring IP is a common step for gifting - for example when copyright on a popular book is gifted to a charity or a foundation by an author. Since we all happily use other GPLed stuff without signing anything, its a bit unimportant what's a license and what's a gift, anyway. I've no desire to split hairs over who did or didn't agree to what. I just had a moment of concern when the source I got wasn't as simply licensed as I hoped for. From your comments, and the other souls who've weighed in, there's no real issue here, provided one accepts that GPL or near-GPLed code is still owned by someone(s). cheers, Nigel.
