Subject: Re: Multi-license - won't it conflict?
From: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
Date: Mon, 18 Apr 2011 08:40:00 +0100

 Mon, 18 Apr 2011 08:40:00 +0100
M.I.Z Khalid wrote:
> 
> But I'd like to know is specifically, where in the GPL text does it 
> mention these above points.

> 1. If I'm the copyright owner, I can re-license it in any way I like. 
> And it won't conflict.

It doesn't need to.  Without an explicit contract term to the contrary, 
the copyright owner can give many different licences for the same code.

I think you have fundamental misunderstandings of what a "licence" is, 
possibly because the proprietary software industry actually uses the 
term to refer to restrictive contracts, not simple licences.

> 
> 2. GPL is a commercial license.

It has wording which permits charging for supply and support, and which 
doesn't permit discrimination against classes of user.

That means ŧhaere are business models that can be based on the supply of 
GPLed software (e.g Red Hat) and ŧhat businesses may use GPLed software.




-- 
David Woolley
Emails are not formal business letters, whatever businesses may want.
RFC1855 says there should be an address here, but, in a world of spam,
that is no longer good advice, as archive address hiding may not work.