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

Re: PHPNuke license

On Sat, Mar 01, 2003 at 09:51:18PM +0100, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Nick Phillips <nwp@nz.lemon-computing.com>
> > I believe you are mistaken; it is quite possible to include the GPL verbatim
> > along with extra restrictions if you state that the license you are releasing
> > your code under is the GPL (and include it) as modified by the following
> > restrictions (and list them), which take precendence over the GPL where the
> > two conflict.
> Agreed. In particular, in such a hybrid licence, the word "this
> License" in the GPL text would naturally be taken to refer to the
> entire hybrid rather than just to the GPL.

I don't think the FSF intends the GNU GPL license text to be interpreted
that way.  (I could be wrong, though...)

> > To attempt to coerce upstreams into modifications of their intended licenses
> > by pretending otherwise is, IMHO, deceitful, immoral & hypocritical.

I don't think it's a pretense.

> I concur. (Bad things do happen if the licensor thinks that such a
> license is compatible with pure GPL in either directions, though).

One problem is that they usually do.

G. Branden Robinson                |      Intellectual property is neither
Debian GNU/Linux                   |      intellectual nor property.
branden@debian.org                 |      Discuss.
http://people.debian.org/~branden/ |      -- Linda Richman

Attachment: pgp7veRaOFxZQ.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply to: