Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Thu, 9 Sep 1999 16:46:49 -0700
From:      "Dave Walton" <>
To:        Brett Glass <>, "David Schwartz" <>, <>, <>, <freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG>
Subject:   RE: Berkeley removes Advertising Clause
Message-ID:  <>
In-Reply-To: <>
References:  <000001befa71$c3920e10$>

Next in thread | Previous in thread | Raw E-Mail | Index | Archive | Help
On 9 Sep 99, at 4:02, Brett Glass wrote:

> At 08:16 PM 9/8/99 -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
>  >The rights of the original copyright holder to
> >the derived work are precisely the same as to the original work.
> Not quite. The original copyright holder can't publish the derivative work
> without permission from the person or person(s) who introduced new
> material.

But if they use the same license you did, then you have just as 
much right to publish a derivative of their work as they have to 
publish a derivative of your work.

> This is one of the traps inherent in the GPL. If you publish GPLed
> code, and someone else modifies it and publishes an enhanced version, your
> original code may now be obsolete. But you don't have the right to do what
> you want with the improved code unless the person who improved it grants
> you that right. 

You have as much right the other person's improvements as they 
had to your code.  

> Since the new contributor is likely to embrace the GPL's
> anti-commercial ethos, it's unlikely that he will grant you the right to
> sell the updated version for money. In a sense, your code has "run away"
> from you. 

I was going to dispute this, but I went and re-read the GPL first.  
You do have a point, in a sense.


Dave Walton                                  

To Unsubscribe: send mail to
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message

Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <>