Legacy approval request - The PostgreSQL Licence

[John Cowan]

Richard Fontana scripsit:

> Are you confirming then that the license of PostgreSQL doesn't permit
> sublicensing, even (somehow) by implication? I might conclude from that
> that the license is GPL-incompatible, which is an issue that Tom tracks
> for licenses that are approved for distribution by Fedora. (Not that
> that has anything to do with OSI approval.) 

As far as I can see, the right to sublicense is irrelevant.
An MIT/BSD-style license grants rights to anyone in lawful possession of
the source code, however that possession came to be.  If Alice writes code
under this license and sends it to Bob, then Bob can create derivative
works and/or incorporate it into other software.  He has no need to
reissue the code under his own license.

I think the omission of sublicensing is a distinction without a
difference.

IANAL, TINLA, but not UPL either.

-- 
John Cowan  cowan at ccil.org   http://ccil.org/~cowan
Assent may be registered by a signature, a handshake, or a click of a computer
mouse transmitted across the invisible ether of the Internet. Formality
is not a requisite; any sign, symbol or action, or even willful inaction,
as long as it is unequivocally referable to the promise, may create a contract.
       --Specht v. Netscape