Woops -- sent this to Branden rather than the list at first.
Branden Robinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> The GNU GPL is not fairy dust. You cannot sprinkle it over a work that
> is under some other license, and change that license. You cannot
> sprinkle it over a work that is in the public domain, and take that work
> out of the public domain.
Certainly not.
I don't know the law here, so I'm not going to try to discuss this on
the basis of what's legal vs what's not. But I think that at the very
least you're violating a principle of least surprise here -- which,
especially in the case of a license, is a very Bad Thing.
While it's true that (for example) public domain code doesn't become
GPL when it's included in a GPL'd work, it's also true that the
recipient of such a combination can simply assume "If the GPL let's me
do something, I can do that with this work." My understanding has
always been that this is because the GPL does not permit added
restrictions above & beyond its own. The discussion to this point has
led me to question this understanding.[1]
But whether this is legally ok is not really the point. People are
going to be surprised, confused, upset, etc., when they're bit by
this. That's a bad thing, and so if it's at all possible it should be
avoided.
[1] A work that contains both GPL'd and DFCL'd content *does* in fact
have an extra condition, namely:
* If you remove portion X (the gpl'd code) from this work the
resultant work is bound by the DFCL's added restrictions (e.g.,
you must include the endorsements section).
--
Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
--
Jeremy Hankins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
PGP fingerprint: 748F 4D16 538E 75D6 8333 9E10 D212 B5ED 37D0 0A03
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
