On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 21:24:23 +1000 Matthew Palmer wrote:
> As to the loophole: 3b says "When modifications to the Software *are
> released under this license*, a non-exclusive royalty-free right is
> granted to the initial developer" (emphasis mine). So if the changes
> are released under a different licence, upstream is screwed --
> especially if it's a QPL-incompatible licence (such as the GPL). The
> only circumstance I can find where a change must be released under the
> QPL is when binary distribution takes place. If I only distribute my
> patch, upstream has no special right to my code.
Yes, of course.
I think you are quite right.
--
| GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 | $ fortune
Francesco | Key fingerprint = | Q: What is purple
Poli | C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 | and commutes?
| 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 | A: A boolean grape.
Attachment:
pgpsGq1hCZUUs.pgp
Description: PGP signature