On Sat, 20 Apr 2002, Daniel Quinlan wrote: > Bart Schaefer writes: > > > That doesn't matter. The *GPL* says that I can't include my GPL'd > > code in any other work that is not GPL'd. Even if SA's license says > > it's OK, I'm contradicting my own license if I do so. > > You don't need license code you own to yourself. If you own the code, > you can do whatever you want.
"My own license" in the excerpt above doesn't mean the license I have, it means "the license terms that I have chosen to impose" when distributing something to a third party. I would have thought that was clear from the context that you elided. > > Quoth the GPL: "... it is not the intent of this section to claim rights > > or contest your rights to work written entirely by you; rather, the intent > > is to exercise the right to control the distribution of derivative or > > collective works based on the Program." > > > > Note in particular: "control," not "ensure." > > If you can't control the distribution, you can't ensure anything. That's entirely non sequitur. As is this: Say "Hi" to Bob Glickstein if you see him around Transmeta somewhere. _______________________________________________ Spamassassin-talk mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/spamassassin-talk
