On Sun, 2 Sep 2007, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
>Haha, show me proof. Where does it say so? Come on, don't hide behind

quoted text
>assumptions. Where it the text below does it say so? Don't give me any

>interpretation blablabla, just put some ^^^ underneath the words...

>

> * Copyright (c) 2007 Jiri Slaby

> * All rights reserved.

> *

> * Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without

> * modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions

> * are met:

> * 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright

> *    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer,

> *    without modification.

> * 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce at minimum a disclaimer

> *    similar to the "NO WARRANTY" disclaimer below ("Disclaimer") and any

> *    redistribution must be conditioned upon including a substantially

> *    similar Disclaimer requirement for further binary redistribution.

> * 3. Neither the names of the above-listed copyright holders nor the names

> *    of any contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived

> *    from this software without specific prior written permission.

> *

> * Alternatively, this software may be distributed under the terms of the

> * GNU General Public License ("GPL") version 2 as published by the Free

> * Software Foundation.

The basis of your argument appears to be that you interpret the last

paragraph above (starting with "Alternatively") as explicit permission

to replace all of the previous material (starting with "Redistribution

and use") with the GPLv2.  Is this inference correct?
IANAL, so I'm not going to speculate on the correct legal interpretation

of this text; I will grant that, if it were ordinary speech, I can see

how someone who tried hard enough could believe that interpretation.
However, in the case that started this discussion, the original author's

intent has, IIRC, been clearly and authoritatively stated to exclude

that interpretation -- so anyone who is aware of this yet still changes

the license text in this case is, at the very least, behaving

unethically.
	Dave
--

Dave Anderson