[Approval Request] BSD-Lite license

John Cowan jcowan at reutershealth.com
Tue Nov 27 18:29:11 UTC 2001

Chris Gehlker wrote:

> I also looked at his site and I see what's bothering him. It's the language
> which says "distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License,
> whose permissions for other licensees extend to the entire whole, and thus
> to EACH AND EVERY PART (emphasis added) regardless of who wrote it.
> I have no idea what "each and every part" means in this context.

I think it means exactly what it says: if you release a work
under the GPL, then every part of the work must allow recipients to do
all the things that the GPL allows.  There can be no components that
aren't freely distributable, or that don't allow further derivative
works, etc. etc. etc.

This is fundamentally why the GPL is compatible only with licenses
that allow all of what the GPL allows (or more), and forbid only what
the GPL forbids (or less).

Not to perambulate             || John Cowan <jcowan at reutershealth.com>
    the corridors               || http://www.reutershealth.com
during the hours of repose     || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
    in the boots of ascension.  \\ Sign in Austrian ski-resort hotel

license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

More information about the License-discuss mailing list