From: Alexander Terekhov (terekhov_at_[hidden])
Date: 2006-07-24 05:16:29
Gennaro Prota wrote:
> >If we talk about *pure opinions* (for what they are worth) I'd like
> >"subject to" or "subject to the terms of".
> I forgot "Released under", which also looks attractive. And BTW, I've
Nah. Under unwritten GNU legal theory, one can take something released
under "GPL compatible" (whatever that means) license and (re)license
it under the GPL (in a "whole") even if that "GPL compatible" license
says nothing about (re)licensing under the GPL akin to LGPL section 3.
This, of course, works only in the GNU Republic, but I'd nevertheless
refrain from using "Released under" wording.
Oh, BTW, Nimmer on GPL legal schizophrenia, stunning double-speak, and
etc. (quite entertaining and informative reading):
LEGAL ISSUES IN OPEN SOURCE AND
FREE SOFTWARE DISTRIBUTION1
RAYMOND T. NIMMER
1 This materials have been adapted from Chapter 11 in Raymond T.
Nimmer, The Law of Computer Technology (1997, 2005 Supp.).
Boost list run by bdawes at acm.org, gregod at cs.rpi.edu, cpdaniel at pacbell.net, john at johnmaddock.co.uk