On Jun 15, 2007, Al Viro <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 03:18:24PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 15, 2007, Al Viro <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> > *OR* inherits the default license of the project.
>>
>> You got any case law for this? Seriously, I could use this for
>> FSFLA's IRPF2007-Livre project.
>> http://fsfla.org/svnwiki/blogs/lxo/pub/freeing-the-lion
> Umm... What other license choices are there?
Where does it say that there must be one?
> No specific case law, but I'd expect serious [eventual] trouble for
> somebody trying to slap some different license in such case.
Consider this (to make the freeing-the-lion story short):
Jar file with .class files, with a copy of LGPL in the root of the
tree. No other license anywhere to be seen. Is it safe to assume
the whole thing is under the LGPL?
--
Alexandre Oliva http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]