"S h i v " <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, Derek E. Lewis wrote:
> and any lawyer worth the air he or she breathes to sufficiently
> dispute this in court, I think.
>
> On 8/10/07, Alan DuBoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > they have a specific side they err on, and this is one of
> > those issues that seems to be accepted by them.
>
> Unless the putting the code into gpl tree is something we *badly want*,
> if there is ambiguity and scope for legal battle, err on the side that
> avoids litigation. No point in getting into litigations that distracts
> & frustrates everyone.
>
> While contributing CDDL code to GPL code might not be a problem, that
> part of the contributed CDDL code would need to be re-licensed or
> dual-licensed under GPL compatible code.
ZFS is a separate "work", you do not need to relicense it under the GPL and you
cannot.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
