lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1999]   [Nov]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: Reiserfs licencing - possible GPL conflict?
Peter Samuelson wrote:
> The act of distributing GPL-compatibly-licensed software integrated
> with GPL software *makes* the whole thing GPL-licensed.

Not quite. The thing *as a whole* is GPL-licensed, but its compenents
may be extracted under their original license terms.

> > No. GPL software may not be integrated with non-GPL-compatible
> > software. That's a significant difference, when the no-ads BSD
> > licence and the MIT licence are both GPL compatible.
>
> In my opinion this distinction is moot, because of the nature of the
> GPL itself.

"may not be integrated with non-GPL software" appears, to me, to refer
to software that is non-GPL *prior* to integration.

Your point about integrated software becoming GPLed as a whole refers to
*after* integration.

Therefore, the clause "may not be integrated with non-GPL software" is
an additional restriction beyond the GPL, which is not permitted by a
clause in the GPL, so the overall license is not GPL and is
self-contradictory.

Also "integrated" means different things to different people, including
lawyers. These different things have different consequences according
to the GPL's terms.

-- Jamie

-
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/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [W:0.142 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site