Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 25 Sep 1998 10:08:47 -0700 (PDT) | From | Tim Smith <> | Subject | Re: Linux, UDI and SCO. |
| |
On Fri, 25 Sep 1998, Mike A. Harris wrote: > I don't understand how someone can release a program under more > than one license without the licenses conflicting. > > Lets say I make program "foo". In that program, I include the > standard GPL paraphanalia, and notices... If I also strip those > sources of GPL paraphanalia/notices, and then include some other > license, perhaps some strict copyright, with no modifications, > etc... > > Doesn't the second license conflict with the first, and > invalidate one or the other licenses, or both? > > If it is valid to do both, then both become pointless. Someone > takes the "foo" sources, and modifies them. When sued, they say > "Oh, I was using the GPL'd sources". Someone else takes the > sources, and modifies them, not releasing the modifications, and > sells commercially. When sued by the GPL folk, they say "Oh, I > was using the commercial copyright, and I've got permission from > the author."
What you've overlooked is that under your hypothetical, that someone cannot be sued by the "GPL folk", EVEN IF the program is released ONLY under GPL. For example, if I release a program, "bar", under GPL, and Microsoft takes it and modifies it and does not release the source, then I can sue them. You can't. Richard Stallman can't. The FSF can't. No matter how much you, RMS, or the FSF, want GPL to be enforced, I'm the only one who can sue MS in this case.
A license to a piece of code basically gives circumstances under which the owner of the copyright promises not to sue you for using the code in ways that copyright law gives the owner exclusive rights to. So if I release "bar" under GPL, I'm saying "if you follow GPL, I won't sue you". I'm still free to come up with other terms and say "if you follow those other terms, I won't sue you".
In your specific hypothetical, "I was using the GPL'd sources" and "I've got permission from the author" are simply two ways of stating the same thing. The GPL *is* permission from the author, and that is all that it is.
--Tim Smith
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |