When to evaluate dual licenses (was: license categories, was: I'm not supposed to use the ECL v2?)
Rick Moen
rick at linuxmafia.com
Mon Dec 3 22:58:00 UTC 2007
Quoting Chuck Swiger (chuck at codefab.com):
> In that case, the Obj-C extensions involved a bunch of code changes to
> the GCC sources such as the precompiler and the addition of the Obj-C
> runtime library, and I think it was clear that these changes could not
> be separated out from GCC. I believe that NeXT was fairly obliged by
> the GPL to release their changes in that case. [1]
This is a good history and appreciated -- except that NeXT, Inc. was not
actually obligated to release anything: It could have merely ceased
infringement. It elected instead to release code in order to retain the
ability to keep shipping.
(I'm no copyleft partisan, domain name notwithstanding. I merely note
that assertions about forced release are inaccurate, at least in US law,
as that is not a remedy available against copyright tort-feasors.
IANAL. TINLA. YADA.)
--
Cheers, Ceci n'est pas une pipe: |
Rick Moen
rick at linuxmafia.com
More information about the License-discuss
mailing list