Hi Sorry for the long delay. cascardo@debian.org schrieb am 24.09.2019, 14:04 -0300: >On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 05:48:25PM +0200, Sebastian Humenda wrote: >> I would like to request your help on a licencing issue that we are having in >> FreeDict. Since I am the maintainer of the freedict dictionaries in Debian, this >> would affect Debian in the longer term too, hence I thought you might be willing >> to help. >> >> A contributor changed the licencing terms of a dictionary like this: >> >> - <p>Available under the terms of the <ref target="https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html";>GNU General Public License ver. 3.0 and any later version</ref>.</p> >> + <p>Available under the terms of the <ref target="https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-3.0.html";>GNU General Public License ver. 3.0 and any later version</ref> and all changes after version 0.3 (0.3 included) is also released under Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License and any later version (dual license).</p> >> >> According to him, the dual-licencing is fine because the mentioned licence is >> compatible with the GPL. Changes to a file must obey the licencing terms and > >IANAL, TINLA. > >It's one-way compatible, meaning the opposite (dual-licensing a work >under CC-BY-SA 4.0) would be fine. Sorry, but I am not sure what you mean: licencing it CC-BY-SA 4.0 and relicencing it GPL later on is fine? So for my concrete issue, the change needs to be reverted? Thanks Sebastian
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature