On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Alan Cox wrote:
So, a multi-licensed file remains multi-licensed except when all authors
agree about a change in the licensing terms. And it is clear on the BSD
Not strictly true. They can either agree to a change and issue one or
they can convey to other parties the right to change the terms. The GPL
for example does this for version selection.
So, under a dual-licensed BSD/GPL code the latter license allows a
developer to remove the GPL license itself and release a single-licensed
BSD code if other parties want to do it?
A multi-licensed work (note work not file - don't assume a file is a
boundary of a work) which conveys the choice of licence (as some bits of
ath5k did) allows a receiving party to choose the licence it wishes.
Failing that OpenBSD would have turned itself GPL by adding that file as
according to your argument "it must be distributed under *all* these
licensing terms concurrently".
I would assume a file as a boundary of a work in the case that file is
under different licensing terms to the rest of the software package. On a
lot of software packages different modules are covered under different
licensing terms.
We can choose what license terms we will honor; however, we do not have
the ability to remove the licensing terms we do not like.
Igor.
-
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]
