2007/9/5, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <rms@1407.org>:
quoted text
> On Wed, Sep 05, 2007 at 01:53:53AM +1000, Sunnz wrote:
> > 2007/9/3, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra <rms@1407.org>:
> > > Then a choice of licenses is offered to the receiver. If he only uses the
> > > software, neither affects him, but if he distributes, he either does it
> > > under the terms of the GPL v2 or under the terms of the BSD, or just as
> > > dual licensed. Actually, strictly speaking, the word *alternatively* might
> > > be interpreted in a more radical way as meaning you can't distribute in a
> > > dual licensed form, but I don't subscribe that.
> >
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > My understanding is:
> >
> > 1) BSD/ISC and GPL Licenses are just a set of condition that you need
> > to satisfy should you like to re-distribute its code.
>
> Two sets, actually, that interssect for the most portion of them.
>
> > 2) Dual License means you need to satisfy conditions of either BSD/ISC, or GPL.
> >
> > So basically, all it tells you is that you are granted to
> > re-distribute the source code under certain conditions, that however
> > does not grant you any permission to alter its copyright notice,
> > right?
>
> If the person chooses to use the GNU GPL they have to respect the GNU GPL's
> conditions, not the BSD ones.

GNU GPL, however, only grants the right to re-distribute (under
certain conditions), but not re-license, right?

BTW, if satisfying requires in GPL would imply satisfaction of BSDL anyway, no?

quoted text
>
> Rui
>
> --
> Wibble.
> Today is Boomtime, the 28th 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...?
>


-- 
Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0