On Thu, 21 Oct 2004, Brian Thomas Sniffen wrote: > If it were a compilation, that would be fine. But in many cases -- > including this one, I think -- it's not. We have a license to the > original work from the original author, and to the derivative work > from the upstream. But the original author also has a copyright on > the derivative work, and we have no license to it from him.
The original author has a copyright on his work that is included in the derivative work, not a copyright on the derivative work itself. Because of the way GPL ยง6 is worded, our license always stems from the original licensor, not the person who is doing the distribution or modification. If this is still a problem, perhaps try asking [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm fairly certain that I'm interpreting this reasonably, but they are the ones who interpret the GPL on a daily basis. Don Armstrong -- Quite the contrary; they *love* collateral damage. If they can make you miserable enough, maybe you'll stop using email entirely. Once enough people do that, then there'll be no legitimate reason left for anyone to run an SMTP server, and the spam problem will be solved. Craig Dickson in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.donarmstrong.com http://rzlab.ucr.edu
