> In my _personal_opinion_, dual licensing gives you the right to chooseDual licensing gives every recipient both licenses from the original author. You can choose which license you will obtain rights from. Really? Which license or law gives you the right to change the licensing terms on code you didn't write? At least in the United States, you cannot change the licensing terms on someone else's code absent a written re-licensing agreement. Every recipient of dual-licensed creative works or elements of works can obtain rights from either license. You only need comply with the requirements of one of the licenses to obtain rights from it. If you redistribute the code, every recipient gets the same rights you got from the original authors of every creative element you redistribute. The distributor can choose by which license he obtains the right to distribute, but this has no effect on the license his recipients get! (This should be common sense. If you buy a music CD from Amazon, do you think how Amazon got the right to sell you the CD should have an effect on what you can do with the CD?) You can remove the BSD license notice, because the GPL gives you that right (it only requires you to retain notices that refer to "this License", the GPL, not other licenses). But removing a license *notice* does not change the license. (That should be common sense too.) If you modify the code, of course, they only get the rights you choose to give them to anything you added (assuming it is sufficiently creative to warrant copyright protection). Nobody can grant other people rights to your code that you don't want to grant. But you cannot add or subtract licensing terms to code you did not write (at least, neither the GPL nor the BSD license give you this right). The license grant is direct from the original author to the ultimate recipient. The GPL makes this explicit in section 6, "Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein." The BSD license does not make this explicit, but there is no other legal way it could work. The BSD license, of course, permits you to impose further restrictions on the recipients' exercise of rights to the modifications you made while the GPL does not. DS --
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Linus Torvalds | Linux 2.6.26-rc4 |
| Fred . | Please add ZFS support (from GPL sources) |
| Greg KH | Linux 2.6.25.10 |
git: | |
| Alexander Gladysh | [Q] Encrypted GIT? |
| Kevin Leung | Edit log message after commit |
| Pietro Mascagni | GIT vs Other: Need argument |
| Michael Hendricks | removing content from git history |
| GVG GVG | ssh_exchange_identification: Connection closed by remote host |
| Edwin Eyan Moragas | poll(2) vs kqueue(2) performance |
| Didier Wiroth | win32-codecs, avi and amd64 question |
| Daniel Ouellet | identifying sparse files and get ride of them trick available? |
| Daniel Brewer | Re: fsync performance hit on 1.6.1 |
| Hubert Feyrer | Compressed vnd handling tested successfully |
| Elad Efrat | Integrating securelevel and kauth(9) |
| YAMAMOTO Takashi | yamt-km branch |
