<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/11/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Alexander Terekhov</b> <<a href="mailto:alexander.terekhov@gmail.com">alexander.terekhov@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
On 10/11/07, Michael Tiemann <<a href="mailto:tiemann@opensource.org">tiemann@opensource.org</a>> wrote:<br>[...]<br>> Licenses like the GPL (versions 2 and 3) are cohort sinks: they permit<br>> others to relicense under their terms
<br><br>Huh? What do you mean by "relicense", Mr. Tiemann?<br><br>GPLv3:<br><br>"Sublicensing is not allowed; section 10 makes it unnecessary. ... the<br>recipient automatically receives a license from the original
<br>licensors"<br><br><a href="http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html">http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html</a><br><br>So please elaborate. TIA.</blockquote><div><br><br><div><br>Mr Tiemann's view was actually
quite clear. The argument is that some licenses such as the SimPL
allow downstream authors to essentially pretend that the code was
released under the GPL from the start. His wording was: "I would like
this list, and the board, to consider the proposition that
we could define a trivial compatibility licensing cohort, namely, any
licenses that permit either relicensing under substantially similar
terms (such as SimPL does for the GPL) or permits arbitrary copying,
modification, and redistribution along with any other licenses (subject
to a limitation of warranty for the initial contributor(s)) and is
subject to no further restrictions be treated as a member of the cohort
license group.
"<br><br>In essence any license which allows for "relicensing" in the
same sense as the SimPL OR allows for arbitrary copying, modification,
and distribution along with other licenses u nder the terms stated
above....
<br><br>Relicensing applies to the SimPL while arbitrary copying, modiication, and distribution applies to the BSDL.<br><br>Is that more clear?<br><br>Best Wishes,<br><span class="sg">Chris Travers<br> </span></div><span class="q">
<br></span><br> </div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">regards,<br>alexander.<br><br>--<br>"PJ points out that lawyers seem to have difficulty understanding the
<br>GPL. My main concern with GPLv3 is that - unlike v2 - non-lawyers can't<br>understand it either."<br> -- Anonymous Groklaw Visitor<br></blockquote></div><br>