Subject: Re: [OT?] GPL v3 FUD, was For Approval: MLL (minimal library license)
From: "Chris Travers" <chris.travers@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:45:04 -0800
Fri, 30 Nov 2007 12:45:04 -0800
On Nov 30, 2007 11:43 AM, Alexander Terekhov <alexander.terekhov@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
>
> * <db@FreeBSD.ORG> wrote this file. As long as you retain this notice
> you
> * can do whatever you want with this code, except you may not
> * license it under any form of the GPL.
> * A postcard or QSL card showing me you appreciate
> * this code would be nice. Diane Bruce va3db


It seems like an open question whether, if you incorporate a file verbatim
under this license into a GPL'd work whether that is a violation of the
license.   IANAL, though.

It depends on what is meant by "this code," I suppose.  An email to the
author for clarification would be a good idea.  My narrow reading of it
suggests that there is no compatibility problem (i.e. "this code" means
"this code Diane provided" and does not extend to modifications made to it)
but it would be good to check.  Since it is not safe to assume one can just
change the license on permissively licensed code itself , this would not
seem to me to be *any* different than using ISC-licensed code.

However, when in doubt, it is a good idea to ask.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers



On Nov 30, 2007 11:43 AM, Alexander Terekhov <alexander.terekhov@gmail.com> wrote:


* <db@FreeBSD.ORG> wrote this file. As long as you retain this notice
you
* can do whatever you want with this code, except you may not
* license it under any form of the GPL.
* A postcard or QSL card showing me you appreciate
* this code would be nice. Diane Bruce va3db

It seems like an open question whether, if you incorporate a file verbatim under this license into a GPL'd work whether that is a violation of the license.   IANAL, though.

It depends on what is meant by "this code," I suppose.  An email to the author for clarification would be a good idea.  My narrow reading of it suggests that there is no compatibility problem (i.e. "this code" means "this code Diane provided" and does not extend to modifications made to it) but it would be good to check.  Since it is not safe to assume one can just change the license on permissively licensed code itself , this would not seem to me to be *any* different than using ISC-licensed code.

However, when in doubt, it is a good idea to ask.

Best Wishes,
Chris Travers