Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 02:07:31 -0800 From: obrien@NUXI.com (David O'Brien) To: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: GPL Message-ID: <19970218020731.GM57190@dragon.nuxi.com> In-Reply-To: <Mutt.19970218095033.j@uriah.heep.sax.de>; from J Wunsch on Feb 18, 1997 09:50:33 %2B0100 References: <Pine.BSF.3.91.970217185359.2982A-100000@darkstar> <199702180517.WAA17000@obie.softweyr.ml.org> <19970217235135.LP40831@dragon.nuxi.com> <Mutt.19970218095033.j@uriah.heep.sax.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
J Wunsch writes: > As David O'Brien wrote: > > Say someone has written fooquix and from version 0.01 to 0.49 it was > > GPL'ed. Then they decided they wanted to make some $$$ from it. So the > > next release (say 0.50) was binary only. Now obiviously 0.50 is derived > > work based on the GPL'ed code of 0.49. > > > > Is this allowable, or once software is under GLP it stays there? > > It gets problematic for everything that other contributed under the > terms of GPL from version 0.01 through 0.49. Either they all agree in > the new copyright, or you've got a problem. :) So in theory, the author of every little patch needs to be consulted? Hum... :-) -- -- David (obrien@NUXI.com -or- obrien@FreeBSD.org)
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19970218020731.GM57190>