Re[2]: Licensing

[Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder]

--=-tt77Me5vuYIFFji1GFyD
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, 2002-03-26 at 18:59, DeBug wrote:

[...]
> GPL'ed software is offered (for extra money) to those who are not satisfi=
ed with GPL
> conditions, that means in fact that those who use the software under
[...]

I think double licensing (if that's what you mean here) is a very bad
thing - but I don't think it'll play an important role in the future: if
I understand copyright law correctly, only the copyright holder can give
out licenses. For most open source projects, the copyright holder is
either somebody like GNU (who never will play such games, I guess), or
the contributing deveolpers have kept the copyright of their respective
portions (I believe this is how the Linux kernel is distributed), so
double licensing would involve getting permissions from all copyright
holders.

Just my $.02

-- vbi


--=-tt77Me5vuYIFFji1GFyD
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEABECAAYFAjyguPcACgkQFDhRaJIIJIGGbQCfWxOm1PLHOlM28W7fV/rcb0M+
vFUAmQG2Man4QLQ8ElA3uwg1kcESSmwa
=ca+T
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--=-tt77Me5vuYIFFji1GFyD--