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!