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

Re: is this free?

Seth David Schoen <schoen@loyalty.org> writes:
> Henning Makholm writes:

> > They could simply say: To the best of our present knowledge we have
> > the only  copyright to this software. We can't absolutely guarantee
> > If a third party can demonstrate a copyright claim on the
> > software, you'll need HIS permission to copy in addition to ours.

> > Then they wouldn't need to revoke anything, and that is IMO the only
> > free approach to that kind of eventualities.

> I felt that the IBM Public License did an excellent job of expressing
> this basic position.  It says:

It looks definitely nice, yes.

I was wrong, though, in stating that this only free approach. The
GPL's approach is different but also free. Basically: "If you know
that some third party has a copyright on (parts of) the code and has
not licensed those under the GPL, then you *don't* need to negotiate
your own license with said third party, because in that case *our*
permission to copy is void by design".

Henning Makholm                                 "Need facts -- *first*. Then
                                            the dialysis -- the *analysis*."

Reply to: