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

Re: Bug#523093: undetermined copyright/license violation

Hash: SHA1

Robert Millan wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 09, 2009 at 10:27:19PM -0500, Adam Majer wrote:
>> License and copyright are one and the same.
>> GPL license relies on copyright law, just like almost any other open
>> source license there is, be it BSD, Artistic or LGPL. Without copyright,
>> the license is meaningless. Without license, you have no right to the
>> source code.
> Thanks for the explanation;  but I think what you mean is they're dependant
> on each other.  This doesn't imply they're the same thing though.
> I think we all agree the "Copyright" lines, whenever they were present, need
> to be preserved.  The license bits in general too, but what happens when the
> license terms explicitly give you permission to relicense?
> I gave this example in another mail (sorry if I sound redundant);  my
> understanding is that in "2 or later" terms in a GPLv2+ header the license
> version can be updated by recipients of the code, and that keeping the old
> license blob around is not a must;  is this correct?  Does section 12 of LGPL
> 2.1 work the same way?  If not, where's the difference?

No, and anyway, Debian should never do it.
"2 or later" mean that the recipient could *use* a later license, the
derived works could be licensed with (maybe only) a later license, but no,
the original code has own (old) license and cannot (should not) be changed.

Maybe taking derived code (e.g. including new code), one could write only
the license of aggregate work (thus one "later" license), but I think:
1- the old code is still "2 or later"
2- it is better not to mix licenses in one file, so it is better
   to add new code or with the same license or in an extra file
   (no problem removing part of old file)
3- Debian should allow the more liberal license as possible,
   thus maintaining the option to use the "old" license terms.

Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org


Reply to: