> Yes, of course it is. But the license really only applies to that portion > of the derivative that is your work. The term "relicensing" implies > otherwise, which is why I object to it.
why does it imply that? a licence is merely a contract; i can slap any licence i want on a public domain work, and anyone who abides by the terms of the contract will have the permissions granted by it. *however*, in the case of a public domain work that's not the only way to get permisson to use, distribute, or modify the work; in fact, you already have the legal right to do so, at least under copyright law (other things, like export restrictions, might prevent you from copying public domain work) by definition of public domain. in a shorter paragraph: relicencing doesn't necessarily imply removal of existing licence (including the licence provided by the gov't in the form of the public domain). --p. "For a price I'd do about anything, except pull the trigger: for that I'd need a pretty good cause" -- Queensryche, "Revolution Calling" PGP 5.0 key (0xE024447449) at http://cif.rochester.edu/~jpt/pubkey.txt
