Freek Dijkstra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 22-8-2004 14:58, "Andrew Suffield" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> This is a GPL-incompatible, copyleft, DFSG-free license. In other >> respects it is a MIT clone, not a BSD one; this is essentially a >> copyleft MIT license. > > Out of curiousity: > What makes a licence GPL-compatible? In particular, why is this one not? > I understand if it places additional restrictions the GPL does not have. But > I didn't spot it here.
It requires that derived works be released under the same license. The GPL requires that derived works be released under the GPL. You can't do both of these at the same time. -- Matthew Garrett | [EMAIL PROTECTED]
