> \begin{RankSpeculationRequest}
> Does anyone have a good feel for the impact of adding BSD-, MIT-, or
> CCL-licensed content to a base that is licensed under GPL2 (as I
> think SAGE is now); or under GPL3?
>
> My recollection is that it isn't pretty.
> \end{RankSpeculationRequest}
I forgot to mention -- by BSD, I mean the modified BSD license *without the
advertising clause*.
To answer your question: it doesn't "feel" good, that's for sure. I'm not a
lawyer, but this is my understanding of the situation.
Creative Commons creates a legal equivalent of public domain where it doesn't
already exist. At that point, Microsoft can use it, improve / harm it in any
way they like, take all the credit, and turn a profit. It's essentially a
license to relicense it under your own name.
BSD (modified) and MIT add only the requirement that you preserve the license.
So, they can be included by anything and modified at will. Changes may be
released under incompatible licenses.
GPL licensed code imposes severe restrictions on those who modify the code:
* changes must be released under GPL
* anybody who distributes (with the exception of p2p like bittorrent, for
v3) binaries must also distribute source
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
To post to this group, send email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel
URLs: http://sage.scipy.org/sage/ and http://modular.math.washington.edu/sage/
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
