On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 11:17:40AM +0200, Siegbert Marschall wrote:

quoted text
> > On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 04:55:34PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote:

> >> > The license is not an alternative. The alternative is between two

> >> licenses.

> >> >

> >> > The moment one chooses one them... it's that one henceforth.

> >>

> >> And... you are a judge?

> >

> > Theo, be as unreasonable as you want.

> >

> > The copyright notice tells the user he can choose between two licenses.

> > If you choose the GNU GPL vs, you can't later on change to BSD or

> > proprietary for that would be a copyright violation.

> >

> > 	*Copyright notice != license*

> no. the copyright notice tells you that you can use GPL2 for distribution,

> not that you can "choose" it.

Maybe my choice of words wasn't clear enough. The copyright notice tells

you that *alternatively* (this means if you don't want to use the BSD) under

the terms of the GNU GPL v2.
Alternative implies choice, you choose which alternative you want.
Rui
--

Fnord.

Today is Setting Orange, the 26th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3173

+ No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown

+ Whatever you do will be insignificant,

| but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi

+ So let's do it...?