On Tue, 3 Aug 2004 21:24:23 +1000 Matthew Palmer wrote: > As to the loophole: 3b says "When modifications to the Software *are > released under this license*, a non-exclusive royalty-free right is > granted to the initial developer" (emphasis mine). So if the changes > are released under a different licence, upstream is screwed -- > especially if it's a QPL-incompatible licence (such as the GPL). The > only circumstance I can find where a change must be released under the > QPL is when binary distribution takes place. If I only distribute my > patch, upstream has no special right to my code.
Yes, of course.
I think you are quite right.
--
| GnuPG Key ID = DD6DFCF4 | $ fortune
Francesco | Key fingerprint = | Q: What is purple
Poli | C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12 | and commutes?
| 31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4 | A: A boolean grape.
pgpiAMZbGHnr2.pgp
Description: PGP signature
