license suggestions?

[Chris Gonnerman]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Chris Watson" <chris at voodooland.net>
> > The BSDL doesn't *have* to mention that "further restrictions are
> > prohibited"
> > since that is the default.
>
> Yes it does. The license itself says nothing about not adding furhter
> restrictions. It's common knowledge you CAN GPL BSD code.

Like so much "common knowledge" it's based on assumptions and "lore."

> > The GPL states how the creator of derivative works must behave.  If the
> > creator of the derivative work cannot obey both the GPL and the law at
the
> > same time, the law takes precedence always.
>
> > The main reason you hate it seems to be that you have seriously
> > overestimated
> > the power that the license gives to others.  No matter what I or anyone
else
> > wants to do, without your approval I can't change the license of your
code.
>
> No, you simply either haven't read the GPL in its entire form, or you
> don't understand it, or you have never consulted a lawyer about it, or
> your simply ignoring the truth. When you take a copy of a 2 clause BSDL'ed
> piece of code, change a few lines of it and and add that NEW piece of code
> into a GPL work the whole work is GPL'ed.

As an entire work, yes.

> It ceased to be MY work the
> second you modified it.

Wrong.  Regardless of what the license says, copyright law makes it yours
forever.
Under some circumstances I can add my copyright (below yours) but first
claim
is always yours.

> > In the aggregate with GPL code, the aggregate must be distributed as if
the
> > GPL covered the whole thing, but that aggregation still doesn't change
the
> > license of non-GPL code in "the mix."  Further, if the license of the
non-
> > GPL code is GPL-incompatible you simply can't legally distribute the
> > aggregation at all.
>
> Your talking in circles now. Your admitting you can GPL bsd code. "The
> aggregate *must be* distributed as if the the GPL covered the whole
> thing." You are correct.

Cool.  Glad to hear it.  Too bad you aren't reading what I'm writing.

    "as if"

does not change the license.  If I have added your BSDL code to my GPL
project,
I must abide by the GPL.  I cannot under any circumstances force you to do
so.
Your original code, and my changes as well, remain under the BSDL regardless
of
how I license the rest of the project.

> The BSDL does NOT prevent someone from GPL'ing
> the code. It says nothing in the license at all about further
> restrictions, ammending the license etc..

It doesn't HAVE TO.  Have you missed the point?  Copyright and contract law
supercedes the license.  That's why all commercial licenses (and many Open
Source/Free Software licenses) have a clause that says that, should any of
the license stipulations be found illegal or unenforceable, the remainder of
the license stays in effect.  The lawyers who write them KNOW there are
holes.

In other words, it doesn't matter WHAT the GPL says, you and I and all the
other programmers out there still have to abide by the law.  I can't change
the license on your code; I can encase your code in a sort of GPL "shell"
if your license is not GPL-incompatible, but the shell can still be opened
and your code extracted.

In any event, so long as you publish a BSDL version of the code, the only
the only thing you lose in your interpretation are my changes... and that
only because you won't accept the GPL license I have applied.  (This
assuming
I was that kind of jerk, which I am not.)

FWIW I have several small public projects, and here is the license mix:

    Ginsu (GPL) -- because I borrowed a GPL module from QuakeForge
    WConio (Public Domain) -- because I borrowed code from a public domain
        software package and thought it most respectful to leave the license
        status as is.
    Alternative Readline (BSD-like) -- because I borrowed a fragment of C
        from the effbot and applied a similar license to my modules.
    RBTree (Public Domain) -- C code ported to Python and heavily revised.
        Once again, leaving it in the public domain obeys the wishes of
        the original author.
    ULpr (GPL) -- This one has no borrowed code.  I used the GPL because
        I don't want this program disappearing into the bowels of a
        commercial software project.
    GDmodule (Artistic I think) -- I took this one over from Richard Jones,
        and the license is his.
    Plumber's Helpers (BSD-like) -- These little buggers are all mine, but
        frankly not that inventive.
    Web Publishing System (BSD-like) -- This package is likewise all mine.

So you can see, I don't have an axe to grind.  I'm just tired of all the GPL
haters trying to make it sound like the GPL is equivalent to the Satanic
Verses.