Re: no need to keep non-copylefted files that way in a copylefted project. (was Re: FRR package in Debian violates the GPL licence)
On Wed, 20 Mar 2019, Ole Streicher wrote:
They don't need to do that themself, but they may want to keep that
path open for downstream. And so their license allows that.
Their licence on their portion of the work, perhaps.
However, the work *also* requires a licence from the copyright holders
of the GPL licence they have based their work on, to be distributed or
used, as required by copyright law (whether you like that aspect of
copyright or not). They have deliberately rejected the GPL licence that
was on offer to them, ignored the conditions required by the GPL, and
distributed the code anyway.
As a result, any GPL licence available to them terminated, and no
further offer of a GPL licence is available to them, at this time,
unless this matter is resolved to my satisfaction.
You simply can not obtain their code (the code at issue) from them (or
anyone) under the GPL, therefore /you/ can not distribute or use it
under the GPL either.
And this is not about some concern for some (MIT/X11, BSD) free software
authors - they've fought this tooth and nail for their own commercial
reasons: to try strip copyleft from GPL software they do not have rights
to, for their own financial benefit.
regards,
--
Paul Jakma | paul@jakma.org | @pjakma | Key ID: 0xD86BF79464A2FF6A
Fortune:
The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do
nothing.
- Edmund Burke
Reply to: