> On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 05:29:56PM -0700, David Schwartz wrote:
How do you figure?
That's right. I never said otherwise. I did not say that under all conceivable circumstances, the GPL gives you the right to remove a BSD license notice.
The example I was talking about was a dual-licensed work. If you choose to make modifications under the GPL, then you are not obtaining any righst under the BSD license and are under no obligation to comply with its terms. In that case, the GPL gives you the right to remove the BSD license notice. (The license remains, of course, only the notice is gone.)
You are quite correct in the case of a BSD-only work. Since you still need the right to modify and distribute that work and can only get it from the BSD license, you must comply with the terms of the BSD license. One of those terms is not removing the license *notice*.
You are quite correct that if a work is offered under only the BSD license, the BSD license notice must remain in there forever, you cannot remove it because the license says you can't.
I find offensive your characterization of my attempt at honest debate as trolling.
Yes, as a matter of fact. A long time ago, I contributed patches to allow the Sony CDU-535 driver to work as a module. For those who forgot, the Sony CDU-535 was one of the very first CD-ROM devices, almost 1X and with a proprietary interface -- an external drive that required a custom ISA card. For some reason, it's still there, though I find it hard to believe anyone has used it in years.
DS
-
