Re: (reiserfs) Re: License arguements again (debian specific)
Hans Reiser wrote:
> No, it makes it GPL'd with an additional license available if you don't like GPL
> and are willing to pay. It is a GPL restriction that one cannot integrate GPL
> software into non-GPL'd software.
Why not rewrite the statement to be written as a notice of facts rather
than an seemingly added restriction to the license?
Other forms of licensing is available. Contact the author(s) for
details.
Hans,
In what way is the GPL ambigous in this area?
I would say your text is quite ambigous. As I see it after this
discussion, three facts can be read from that short text, all depending
on the reader:
a) It can be read as giving additional permissions to the user to
integrate it into any operating system kernel, GPL or not.
b) To an observer it might look like it puts additional restrictions on
the usage. Not that it does, but if you don't understand how the GPL
licensed software is (not) allowed to be used then one might think so.
c) It can be read as an clarification that there are other forms of
licensing available.
I think your intention is (c) alone, and neither or (a) or (b). If so
then the formulation should not touch any of those areas.
--
Henrik Nordstrom
Reply to: