Joerg Schilling wrote:
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> wrote:You may be right in Europe, in the USA if I hold the copyright I may grant several non-exclusive licenses under different terms. It's not even unusual. With commercial software I may sell a right to use quantity one to an end user, a site or company license to a large organization, and a right to duplicate and resell to another (if I trust them to pay royalties). And I might grant a free right to use to a charity if I was a nice person.I have been reading the dvd+rw-tools FAQ and I have found this in there: === Version 5.6 adds support for Solaris 2.x [commercial licensing terms for distribution on Solaris are to be settled with Inserve Technology]. ===As the program claims to use the GPL, such note would not be legal and commercial use cannot be limited to a single company.Looks like you did not get my point: why should there be a need to use a non GPL variant?
I can't "get your point", only reply to what you said. If that's not your point then why write it? You said it would not be legal and commercial use could not be granted if there was GPL. You are incorrect in the USA.
As you yourself explained about license in Germany, what you said recently is only part of what you said earlier, regarding ways to license and which were mutually exclusive.
-- bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com> CTO TMR Associates, Inc Doing interesting things with small computers since 1979