For Approval: BSD License, PostgreSQL Variant

[Alexander Terekhov]

On 10/12/07, Michael Tiemann <tiemann at opensource.org> wrote:
> On 10/11/07, Alexander Terekhov <alexander.terekhov at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 10/11/07, Michael Tiemann <tiemann at opensource.org> wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Licenses like the GPL (versions 2 and 3) are cohort sinks: they permit
> > > others to relicense under their terms
> >
> > Huh? What do you mean by "relicense", Mr. Tiemann?
>
> I mean that if I create something under the FOO license, and the FOO license
> says "When this code is combined with the GPL (version 2 or version 3), it
> can be relicensed under the appropriate version of the GPL.  I did not mean
> to imply that GPL-covered software could be relicensed under other licensing
> terms.  Licenses like the SimPL explicitly permit relicensing under the GPL.

But the GPL itself states that "the recipient automatically receives a
license from the original licensors". How come that the GPL
relicensors pretend to be "the original licensors" of SimPL'd work?

GPL:

"the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensors"

regards,
alexander.

P.S. http://www.law.washington.edu/CASRIP/License/SimplePublicLicense_annotated.html

LOL.

--
"PJ points out that lawyers seem to have difficulty understanding the
GPL. My main concern with GPLv3 is that - unlike v2 - non-lawyers can't
understand it either."
                          -- Anonymous Groklaw Visitor