Re: One unclear point in the Vim license
Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 02, 2002 at 11:18:26PM +0100, Bram Moolenaar wrote:
> > Theoretically this would be possible. However, for the software to be
> > distributed with another license every person that contributed would have
> > to agree with it, since each person has the copyright for the part he
> > contributed under the GPL. Since there hardly ever is an explicit
> > mentioning of what license is used for the contributed part, implicitly
> > the currently active license applies. Well, I'm not a lawyer but that's
> > how I interpret what I heard (it might actually be different for various
> > countries).
> Wouldn't this apply to you changing the license *at all*? (For example,
> removing the "send-changes-upstream" clause.)
Only when the intention of the license changes. So far I have only
changed the wording. I do send the new text to the vim-dev maillist so
that others can say what they think. If I add the option to distribute
sources with a modified version, this is a real change and I need to
find out if there is anybody who objects to it.
> By the way, are you subscribed to debian-legal? You're getting dropped
> from some CCs in subthreads.
No, I'm not in debian-legal.
Q: How does a UNIX Guru do Sex ?
/// Bram Moolenaar -- Bram@moolenaar.net -- http://www.moolenaar.net \\\
((( Creator of Vim -- http://vim.sf.net -- ftp://ftp.vim.org/pub/vim )))
\\\ Help me helping AIDS orphans in Uganda - http://iccf-holland.org ///