> | While it may be seen as distateful to make modifications to BSD-licensed
> | code, and place those modifications under the GPL or a similar "share
> | alike" license, based upon what I understand of copyright law, it's
> | perfectly legal. Even though BSD-style licenses are compatible with the
> | GPL, there are perfectly acceptable social goals achieved only by
> | releasing under the GPL or a similar license.
>
> I'd say that it goes against the GPL. Yes, the GPL, not the BSD
> license (or the ISC license), GPL. Theo already quoted the relevant
> bits, but I'll quote them again :
>
> For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether
> gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that
> you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the
> source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their
> rights.
1. that's in the preamble, which establishes the spirit
2. 4 paragraphs below you read:
The precise terms and conditions for copying, distribution and
modification follow.
3. later on you learn the "precise term" which is "under the terms of this
License"
So no, you're wrong. Don't bother defending your point of view, it's a waste
of time to both of us, more to you who will write it. :)
Rui
--
P'tang!
Today is Sweetmorn, the 37th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3173
+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown
+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,
| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi
+ So let's do it...?
