Scope of copyright on derivative works

[Wilson, Andrew]

Chuck Swiger wrote:

Andrew Wilson wrote:
>> Adding additional Ts and Cs to the core BSD set is allowed when  
>> creating a
>> derivative of BSDL code, be they GPL terms or (to pick another  
>> prominent usage of
>> BSDL licensed code) those of an Apple proprietary end user license.
>
> You refer to the OSI-approved ASPL (found here: http:// 
> www.opensource.org/licenses/apsl-2.0.php)?

No, I refer to the proprietary Mac OS X end user license, since it is
common knowledge that Mac OS contains large amounts of code
derived from BSD OS.

> Sure-- but these additional Ts and Cs apply only to such  
> modifications, and possibly to the resulting dual-licensed derivative

> work considered as a whole, assuming the modifications are  
> significant enough to merit copyright protection according to 17 USC  
> 103 or equivalent, as Larry Rosen just pointed out.  The original  
> unmodified BSD licensed code remains under the BSDL alone, and the  
> BSD license does not grant anyone the right to modify the terms of  
> the BSD license.

Please quote the relevant section of the BSD copyright which forbids
modifying the terms of the BSD license, as long as said
modified license includes at a minimum
the original notice and disclaimer.  I can't find
such wording in the canonical OSI version.

As you can tell, my view is that BSDL is effectively
extensible in that allows licensing of derivative works under
any license which is a proper superset of the original BSD
copyright.  In the Apple case cited above, presumably the
license which applies to Mac OS is the union of the Apple
EULA plus any underlying BSD copyrights, /not/ a dual license
of Apple EULA and BSD.

Andy Wilson
Intel open source technology center