Re: IBM public license
Raul Miller <email@example.com> writes:
> Henning Makholm <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > Consider the situation where I take some code from a GPL'ed program and
> > some code from a program under the IBM license, add some of my own and
> > wish to distribute the result.
> > Now, since my program is a deriviate of the GPL'ed program, I can only
> > distribute the resulting binary if I also distribute the entire source
> > for it under GPL.
> Er.. the GPL doesn't require that the IBM source be distributed under
> any terms other than the IBM license -- it merely requires that the IBM
> license allow the same permissions as the GPL.
The GPL text I have here says, in section 2
b) You must cause any work that you distribute or publish, that in
whole or in part contains or is derived from the Program or any
part thereof, to be licensed as a whole at no charge to all third
parties under the terms of this License.
This *might* be interpreted to mean that I'm allowed to paraphrase
what the GPL says (but I would not bet on either RMS or a court
agreeing with that interpretation).
But the IBM license only allows changing the license for *object code*
redistribution, which is not what the GPL asks. And the IBM license
itself does quite obviously not pass as a paraphrase of the GPL.