Re: [boost] Previously GPL'd Code

From: Greg Colvin (Gregory.Colvin_at_[hidden])
Date: 2003-01-30 10:42:32

At 08:30 AM 1/30/2003, David Abrahams wrote:
>"Jeff Garland" <jeff_at_[hidden]> writes:
>
>> Glenn --
>>
>> Since this mail seems to have been buried in the usual wave of
>> boost mail, I'll take a stab at it so you at least get a response - FWIW...
>>
>>  
>>> A licensing question for everyone:
>>> 
>>> Is there any problem with submitting, for possible inclusion in
>>> Boost, a library that was previously released under the GNU GPL?
>>> The submission would, in its new incarnation, be covered by a
>>> license that meets the Boost criteria. It would be submitted by
>>> the original copyright holders and would include no modifications
>>> made by others who received the library under the GPL.
>>
>> Since the original copyright holders are effectively changing the terms
>> I don't see why this would present a problem -- they are certainly free
>> to change the terms.
>
>I have not answered because IANAL, so I have no clue whether this is
>legally sound or not.

I'm no lawyer either, but it's not unusual for the owners
of code to release it under both GPL and another license.
The other license is usually more restrictive, but I can't
see that it matters.