Re: GPL v.3?
Joseph Carter writes:
> I still argue that you can derive from the GPL without the GPL permitting
> you do so.
Try it, and see how fast you hear from the FSF's attorney.
> Otherwise, the modified BSD license used in several places (the 2 and 3
> clause versions) would be copyright infringement.
Infringement is a tort, not a crime. Only the copyright owner can sue.
Just because one chooses not to do so does not mean another will.
It also could be argued that the BSD license sections in question are so
short and uncreative as to be uncopyrightable. More importantly, there is
no conceivable reason why UC would suddenly start taking action against
unauthorized uses of the BSD license. What would be in it for them?
> This could get messy fast.
It already is. Law is like that. There is no possibility of an algorithm
that can be used to determine the freeness of any given work.
--
John Hasler
john@dhh.gt.org (John Hasler)
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI
Reply to: