Re: copyright
>>>>> On Tue, 8 Sep 1998 20:29:08 -0700 (PDT), George Bonser <grep@shorelink.com> said:
George> The problem is GPL is "sticky". ONLY the original author may
George> change the license ... I agree (but RMS does not, he says
George> once GPL, always GPL but he is not going to enforce it. The
George> author only has control by default since RMS is leaving it up
George> to the author to press copyright violation charges). Now
George> let's say the author dies. If I use a single line of that
George> code, I must release my code GPL.
RMS has no control over another person's program where that person
distributes it as GPL. RMS wrote the GPL, but that doesn't give him
any special rights over any GPLed program by anyone else. I can
release a piece of software under the GPL and a commercial license and
RMS wouldn't have any legal right to say or do anything. And in fact
if I died RMS wouldn't have any legal right to sue someone over the
violation of my copyright. Only the recipients of my estate would.
Ah, but you are right. You'd have to provide a special exclusion to
the GPL on your changes saying they can be incorporated into the other
program. That should satisfy the problem.
Dres
--
@James LewisMoss <dres@ioa.com> | Blessed Be!
@ http://www.ioa.com/~dres | Linux is kewl!
@"Argue for your limitations and sure enough, they're yours." Bach
Reply to: