Subject: Re: For Approval: Microsoft Permissive License
From: Nils Labugt <elabu@online.no>
Date: Wed, 22 Aug 2007 20:43:41 +0200

ons, 22.08.2007 kl. 09.53 -0700, skrev Chris Travers:
...
> Neither the GPL nor the BSDL is a set of restrictions, but rather a
> permissive grant to do something that otherwise would be restricted by
> law.
They are sets of *conditional* permissions.

...
> 
>           Yes, adding another license in a derivative of BSD code
>         is permitted
>         as long as said license doesn't violate the short list of 
>         thou-shalt-nots in BSD.
> 
> 
> But it requires copyright transfer rather than license.  Therefore it
> is still forbidden because copyrights are not effectively transferred.
> I could be wrong.  IANAL, but I thought that only copyright owners
> (not mere licensees) could dictate such terms.  If I am wrong on this
> point, please educate me by pointing me in the direction of resources
> which prove it.
> 

When you modify a work to create a derivative work, you become a
copyright holder in that work. Actions regulated by copyright law
requires permission from you as well as the other copyright holders. If
all copyright owners in the derivative work grants a certain permission,
but set different sets of conditions on that permission, then the
license becomes that permission together with the sum of all conditions.
If you modify BSD code and places the result under the GPL, then you
grant the same permissions for the derivative work, but adds additional
conditions.


Nils Labugt