>-----Original Message----- >From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Richard >Levitte - VMS Whacker >Sent: Monday, April 17, 2006 4:20 PM >To: openssl-users@openssl.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Subject: Re: Licenses... > > >Not at all, I spoke for myself (I do believe I said that clearly >enough), and only reported what I have seen happening within the >group.
Which isn't relevant unless it results in the license being changed. > I am *not* speaking for anyone else in the group, that's >entirely up to them. And you know, considering the heat and the >visciousness of this debate, I think they are the smarter when >keeping away. > How do you know they are keeping away because of the heat? Perhaps all of them are happy with it as-is right now. But, the group consensus, represented by the license in the code, is what the rest of the world has to deal with. Not me, not you, not what we want. You started this issue of claiming I wasn't speaking for OpenSSL and I responded by saying you wern't either (in effect) and we are back to square one - which is that the rest of the world needs to deal with the consensus of what OpenSSL project is using. > >tedm> What the GPL does is overlay the GPL over code that they use in >tedm> their GPL projects. The original license may remain but since >tedm> the GPL is more restrictive, it becomes the defacto license. > >Not true. If a GPLed project uses a piece of code with a different >license, that piece of code keeps it and can be reused under that >license, not the GPL. That the GPL is used for the whole project and >the rest of the files in the project is a non-issue. > Fine in principle but the reality is you have no way of knowing if part of the less-restrictive code has been touched by GPL code. For example if a Linux distribution takes the BSD telnet daemon and puts it into a Linux distro - fast forward 20 years and the original telnet daemon code is no longer available except in the Linux distro - now how are you going to be able to take that code? You don't know if parts of that code have been modified with GPL, if you take that daemon code and try using it under it's original BSD licence you could be infringing. I think this is the entire basis of the SCO lawsuit over Linux, actually. One more reason the GPL needs to be tested by a few court cases before anyone could take it seriously, but that's neither here nor there. Ted ______________________________________________________________________ OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org User Support Mailing List openssl-users@openssl.org Automated List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED]
