On Sun, 9 Mar 2014 22:52:37 +0800 Paul Wise wrote: > On Sun, Mar 9, 2014 at 7:09 PM, Francesco Poli wrote: > > > I only see the _disadvantage_ of having less rights granted on the parts > > of the modified work that come from the original work... > > That sounds like the age-old permissive vs copyleft debate, definitely > not something I'm interested in discussing here. Sorry, I should have been clearer. I am _not_ against copyleft, _nor_ against permissive non-copyleft. I am not trying to (re-)start that old debate. What I was trying to say is: if the authors of the original work chose to offer a permissive license, as well as a copyleft one, I feel that re-distributing parts of the original work only under the copyleft license is a disadvantage for the final recipients. Hence, if the original work is dual-licensed under BSD/LGPL, I would not personally drop the BSD option for the parts that I incorporate into my own copyleft-licensed derivative work. As a consequence, I think that, once the original authors chose the BSD, they could just as well avoid adding complexity with a BSD/LGPL dual-licensing scheme: the BSD alone is already granting almost all the permissions one could possibly desire... OK, maybe now I am being even more cryptic than before... but hopefully not... :-p -- http://www.inventati.org/frx/frx-gpg-key-transition-2010.txt New GnuPG key, see the transition document! ..................................................... Francesco Poli . GnuPG key fpr == CA01 1147 9CD2 EFDF FB82 3925 3E1C 27E1 1F69 BFFE
Attachment:
pgpvEcVGBw7IT.pgp
Description: PGP signature