Subject: Re: [linux-elitists] Mozilla.org to attempt dual MPL/GPL relicensing of the Mozilla codebase
From: kmself@ix.netcom.com
Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2000 23:46:24 -0700
Wed, 16 Aug 2000 23:46:24 -0700
On Thu, Aug 17, 2000 at 12:56:30AM +0100, Paul J Collins wrote:
> 
> Perhaps not as wonderful as if they went GPL-only; but if this
> succeeds, can GNU Mozilla be far away?
> 
>    http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/mozilla-relicense-faq.html
> 
> This will also eliminate any issues with Galeon redistributing the
> mozembed stuff.  Was the Galeon situation a contributing factor?

This is way cool.  I've been suggesting the dual license track as an
option to Mitchell, at Mozilla, and other companies and organizations
looking at licensing, for about the past six months.

It makes a lot of sense.  You get full GNU GPL compatibility.  If
Mozilla turns out to be something that GPLd projects want to
incorporate, there's a one-way bleed of the code toward the GPL.  I
suspect that the main codebase will be available under the dual license
for some time -- possibly years, but that it will eventually end up
being GPLd.  In the meantime, there is an alternative license to take to
customers and clients who aren't comfortable with the full GPL -- still
far too much of the business world at the moment, but this too will
change.

The Mozilla announcement, on top of Sun's StarOffice announcement last
month, is a serious validation of the GNU GPL as a *component* of
licensing strategies within the corporate realm.

Kudos to the Mozilla team.

-- 
Karsten M. Self <kmself@ix.netcom.com>     http://www.netcom.com/~kmself
 Evangelist, Opensales, Inc.                    http://www.opensales.org
  What part of "Gestalt" don't you understand?   Debian GNU/Linux rocks!
   http://gestalt-system.sourceforge.net/    K5: http://www.kuro5hin.org
GPG fingerprint: F932 8B25 5FDD 2528 D595 DC61 3847 889F 55F2 B9B0


["application/pgp-signature" not shown]