<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">There are really two sides to this
problem. Is your license still OSI certified, and can you do this
legally.<br>
<br>
Regarding the OSI certification, the question is whether all of
the rights granted by the certified license still apply. If this
is the case, you can still say that the work is under the
certified license.<br>
<br>
None of the requirements of the Open Source Definition require
that the license make restrictions, so removing a restriction
would not in general cause a license to no longer be Open Source.<br>
<br>
Then, the legal side. Of course, discuss this with your lawyer:<br>
<br>
1. Make very sure you own the entire thing, or at least rights to
relicense all of the covered code.<br>
2. Given #1, you have the right to apply any number of licenses,
including removal of restrictions.<br>
3. Make sure that all changes you accept are either under the
license exception as you specify it, or have the copyright or the
right to relicense transferred to you.<br>
<br>
Make sure that the way you communicate your removal of a
restriction makes clear that the restriction is removed only
regarding your own property. The GNAT modified GPL does this with
the statement: <i>This exception does not however invalidate any
other reasons why the executable file might be covered by the
GNU Public License.<br>
<br>
</i> Thanks<br>
<br>
Bruce<i><br>
</i><br>
On 07/02/2012 09:48 AM, Felix Krause wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:2D584602-8307-4AF1-B13A-94D58D455560@isobeef.org"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Hi everyone,
does a linking exception to the GPL require approval, or may a software be called open source whenever it is licensed under the GPL, even when the publisher grants the user additional rights?
There are some licenses around that add a linking exception to the GPL. The one I use is the GNAT Modified GPL [1]; but there are also others like the exception in the license of the GNU Classpath project [2]. Both licenses are not mentioned on the OSI site.
I think the core question is, does adding a linking exception to the GPL create a completely new license (which would need approval as open source license), or does it still count as licensed under the GPL and thus open source?
I think it would be a good thing if this question was answered by the FAQ.
Cheers,
Felix
[1]: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT_Modified_General_Public_License">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GNAT_Modified_General_Public_License</a>
[2]: <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/license.html">http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/license.html</a>
_______________________________________________
License-discuss mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:License-discuss@opensource.org">License-discuss@opensource.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss">http://projects.opensource.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/license-discuss</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>