Re: ldp-es_20002103-7_i386.changes REJECTED
On Thu, Oct 31, 2002 at 09:12:31AM +0100, Javier Fernández-Sanguino Peña wrote:
> Note that
> a law could be more restrictive than the WIPO/Berne's (I take it from your
> interpretation that the US law is) but it cannot be more permissive (sp?).
Sure it can. There may be a big hairy mess when someone realizes this,
and it goes to an international court, and then back to the law making
body to revise the law if it so chooses, and others can try sanctions
if they choose not to; but the law, not the treaty is what holds.
> Of course it is. Any author, at any time, as holder of the
> copyright of his original work can change the license of his work and
> previous work and turn it into a non-DFSG work. Example: packet filtering
> code in OpenBSD.
The way the packet filtering license debacle happened, is because there
existed a reading of the license that meant it was never DFSG, and the
upstream held to that reading.
> Contrary to what people might think, not only can I
> chance the license of version X, I can change the license of version X
> minus 1, X minus 2, X minus 3...
You can certainly offer it under a new license; but normally you can't
retract the old license.
David Starner - email@example.com
Great is the battle-god, great, and his kingdom--
A field where a thousand corpses lie.
-- Stephen Crane, "War is Kind"