[PD] PiDiP's legal status

[Hans-Christoph Steiner]

On Jan 17, 2006, at 12:44 AM, Mathieu Bouchard wrote:

> On Mon, 16 Jan 2006, Hans-Christoph Steiner wrote:
>
>> PiDiP is actually GPL'ed since its based on GPL code, effectv.
>
> It doesn't work like that. The GPL isn't some kind of virus that turns
> things into GPL without the author's consent.
>
> A conflict of licenses between GPL and something else first makes the
> software non-distributable, and then the author decides to change the
> license.

Actually, it does work like that in this situation.  PiDiP started with  
GNU GPL'ed code, therefore must remain GPL'ed.  Yves could get  
permission from the effectv for a different license, then change the  
PiDiP license, but that would only affect future versions of PiDiP.

.hc


>
> The GPL (or any other license) doesn't have the power to change the
> license of any other software: it only incitates a change of license
> indirectly. It's not the only option: e.g.:
>
> PiDiP could keep the GPL-incompatible license by replacing all of the  
> GPL
> code by some other differently-licensed compatible non-derivative code.
>
> PiDiP could also get a special permission from Kentaro Fukuchi and all
> other relevant authors for an alternate license on EffecTV: e.g. if
> EffecTV were re-released under the SIBSD or the MITX11 license, then  
> PiDiP
> wouldn't be bound by the GPL anymore and so Yves would not be anymore
> forbidden to add non-free clauses.




________________________________________________________________________ 
____

                   ¡El pueblo unido jamás será vencido!