[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Les Mikesell wrote:
The statement is not wrong - the reason a few that are listed as 
compatible is that the permit themselves to be replaced by the GPL.
You can not legally replace the copyright on a work that was created by 
someone else, unless the license of that work specifically allows you to 
do so.  I believe that there is at least one such license listed, but in 
general, you are incorrect.
This was at the heart of a problem in the Linux kernel, where a driver 
taken from OpenBSD had its copyright notice mistakenly removed:
http://undeadly.org/cgi?action=article&sid=20070829001634

The entire conversation may prove educational. I think that someone from the FSF wrote an article about mixing licensed works after the atheros driver mistake to clarify the legalities for non-lawyers.
When combined in a work with GPL components any other attributes of the original licenses no longer apply.
As above, incorrect.

--
fedora-list mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]
  Powered by Linux