[correct the subject] ;) Qua, 2007-04-11 C s 14:26 +0100, Jeroen Massar escreveu: > [set the topic to make it nice and clear, this has nothing to do with > bcw(4) for a long time now, actually the whole thread avoided it] > > Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: > > Seg, 2007-04-09 C s 18:29 +0100, Jeroen Massar escreveu: > >> GPL is good though if you want to force people to give back the code to > >> you so that you can use it in your own dual-licensed projects. > > > > This shows a fundamental lack of understanding of the way both the GPL > > and generic copyright work. > > > > * Nobody is forced to publish derivative works (as long as they > > keep them inside doors, eg. internal usage in a company) > > > > * Dual licensing in the way you suggest would be a copyright > > violation. > > Did you actually read what I wrote, as the above two points where in my > text, but you deleted that from your reply. You might want to read the > snipped text too :) I actually made a difference between the original > copyright owner (who is allowed to do anything they like with the code) > and somebody adding their stuff, who can't relicense it. As for the > first 'point' you are trying to make, also covered in my text...
What you also said is actually fully irrelevant, since I'm correcting one phrase which has TWO incorrect things, one of them a copyright violation. You can't dual-license other people's GPL'ed contributions. > PS: Please realize that some people want a different kind of freedom > than that other people want, respect that: take your pick, go GPL or > BSD, but don't try to force your religion on other people. You might end > up getting Jehova's witnesses on your neck ;) Please realize that I didn't raise that issue, *you* did. I merely focused on two quite simple technical details which you failed to understand: one of the GPL and another of copyright law. Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? [demime 1.01d removed an attachment of type application/pgp-signature which had a name of signature.asc]
