Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1999 10:28:30 -0700 From: Jason Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov> To: Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> Cc: James Howard <howardjp@wam.umd.edu>, Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com>, Mark Tinguely <tinguely@plains.NoDak.edu>, Hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: BSD XFS Port & BSD VFS Rewrite Message-ID: <199908141728.KAA03154@lestat.nas.nasa.gov>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, 13 Aug 1999 21:46:27 -0700
Mike Smith <mike@smith.net.au> wrote:
> > So, if they were to simply put a BSD license on the code, then everyone
> > would be happy, and there wouldn't be any of the dual-license confusion.
>
> It doesn't work like that; once it's been distributed with Linux it's
> no longer BSD-licensed, it's GPLed. They would still be unable to
> recover post-viral changes and reuse them in their own XFS product.
No, that's not true. The GPL cannot *replace* a license that is on a
piece of code. If people modify a piece of BSD-licensed software, they
are doing so in accordance to the BSD-style license on that code.
What the GPL does is require that full source for the program be included
with the program, and that full source, in my example, would include
a BSD-licensed XFS module.
-- Jason R. Thorpe <thorpej@nas.nasa.gov>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199908141728.KAA03154>