On Fri, 20 Aug 2004 04:51:36 -0400 Glenn Maynard wrote: > Hence, they can't additionally release it under the GPL, because the > software retains a restriction "must be additionally available under > the terms of the QPL", and the GPL forbids that restriction. They > couldn't quite release it under the MIT license, because it would > actually be under the MIT license with a rider that it must also be > available under the QPL's terms (which would still render it GPL- > incompatible). > > So, it doesn't actually allow the initial author to > take the work proprietary, unless I'm reading QPL#3b incorrectly; if > you think I am, I'd appreciate an explanation.
I don't think QPL#3b requires the other licenses to carry an attached
additional restriction such as "must be additionally available under the
terms of the QPL". The recipients of the differently licensed version
have the rights granted by that different license, nothing more, nothing
less.
IMHO, if the initial developer incorporates contributed patches and
releases the whole under the QPL and, separately, under the 2-clause BSD
to his/her best friend, then the latter receives a BSD-licensed software
(with no added restrictions) and can fork it as he/she likes.
The problem, as you pointed out, as many others have been pointing out
(including me...), is that the initial developer can relicense J. Random
Hacker's modifications without being compelled to comply with their QPL
license (because the initial developer has been granted a more
permissive license). In the meanwhile J. Random Hacker has no special
rights to the initial developer's code (no rights beyond the ones
granted by the QPL).
This means that J. Random Hacker cannot distribute his modifications
under the same terms as the license of the original software, at least
not to the initial developer. This fails DFSG#3.
> I believe this is non-free because it requires me to grant rights to
> my modifications that I did not receive for the original work, which I
> believe fails DFSG#3--I can't redistribute under the same terms as the
> license of the original software.
Indeed.
--
| 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.
pgp364nsbEzRB.pgp
Description: PGP signature
