Nathanael Nerode wrote: > scott@netsplit.com wrote: >>So here's a hypothetical situation; say the current upstream maintainer >>was to announce in a very public place, with Cc's to all known >>contributor e-mail addresses, his intent to change the licence of the >>code to GPL-2 (including documentation) and give a full list of >>everything that would fall under it. And then was to give a period (say >>28 days) for objections to be raised. >> >>If none were raised, could they then change the licence? > > No. > > :-P > > Yes, this is what SUCKS about current copyright law. The presumption is "All > rights reserved unless you have explicit permission". Somehow, I doubt you'd say that about a GPL-licensed package with one author who wants to grant a proprietary license to make money. The only difference between this situation and that one is that we like the license change in one of them. :) - Josh Triplett
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature