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

Re: Recently released QPL

On Sat, Mar 13, 1999 at 09:27:57PM -0500, Raul Miller wrote:
> > so i think (and i may propose to the gnu project one of these days)
> > that a proper copyleft should allow the licensee to sublicense
> > the product under any license that preserves the rights and
> > restrictions that are important to the license (including of
> > course the sublicensing clause).
> Er.. the GPL already has this.

Not according to an email I got from RMS about compatibility between the
GPL and other licenses.  The only license that the GPL is compatible with
based on his discription is the X license because in addition to the
license attached to the code (which happens not to conflict with the GPL)
you may quite literally prepend the GPL to the X license.

The LGPL achieves similar effect artificially by allowing you to
relicense the code as GPL at will.

FWIW I disagree with the above, I'm just repeating what RMS indicated to
me over the course of the flam^H^H^H^Hdiscussions while the QPL was still
in draft form.

Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org>            Debian GNU/Linux developer
PGP: E8D68481E3A8BB77 8EE22996C9445FBE            The Source Comes First!
<Reed> It is important to note that the primary reason the Roman Empire
       fail is that they had no concept of zero... thus they could not
       test the success or failure of their C programs.

Attachment: pgpquyYi4Bh3t.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: