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

Re: Redistribution with multiple licenses

Joe Smith wrote:
> "Suraj N. Kurapati" wrote:
>> So when I appended bsd.c to mit.c, did the entire mit.c become 
>> licensed under both licenses?  That is, did the originally-MIT 
>> portions of mit.c inherit the extra condition from the BSD
>> license?
> That is an easy way to view it. Technically, what you had said
> before is perfectly correct, but thinking of the file as being
> licenced under the combination of the conditions is also
> perfectly valid (as long as you realize that if the parts are
> seperated, the original lices still apply, of course).
> In summary, just make sure you meet all the terms of both, and
> you are fine.

Thanks for the clarification. So far I have learned that:

1. A container is governed by all the licenses of its contained items.

This is easy to see when the container is a tarball and the
contained items are disjoint files (mit.c and bsd.c).

However, the same rule also applies when the container is a file and
the contained items are disjoint portions of that file.

2. Unlike a container, a contained item is only governed by its
respective license. Thus, when you extract a contained item, you
only have to obey its respective license.

3. When you modify a contained item, your modifications become
licensed under the contained item's license.

For example, when I modify mit.c, my modifications become pulled
under the MIT license. Since the MIT license allows me to add more
restrictions, I can take the {original MIT code + my modifications}
and release it under BSD or GPL.

Another example: I have a combined.c file which contains disjoint
MIT and BSD portions. When I modify the MIT portions, the same
situation in the previous example applies here, correct?

Please correct me accordingly.

Thanks for your consideration.

Reply to: