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

Re: Recently released QPL

Jonathan P Tomer writes:
> it's not gpl compatible in that you can't take a work that's partially
> qpl and partially gpl and license it under either one.

It's not GPL compatible in that it adds additional restrictions.

> such is the nature of the infective copyleft.

Such is the nature of paragraph 6 of the GPL:

  You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise
  of the rights granted herein.

> however it -does- seem dfsg-free to me

I hadn't noticed than anyone was saying that it wasn't.

> ...you can relicense a piece of code that once had a bsd/x license,
> without even being the original author,..

You cannot "relicense" a work of which you are not the author.
John Hasler                This posting is in the public domain.
john@dhh.gt.org		   Do with it what you will.
Dancing Horse Hill         Make money from it if you can; I don't mind.
Elmwood, Wisconsin         Do not send email advertisements to this address.

Reply to: