Return to BSD News archive
Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!nntp.coast.net!news.kei.com!news.ssd.intel.com!news.jf.intel.com!haertel
From: haertel@ichips.intel.com (Mike Haertel)
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc,comp.unix.advocacy,comp.unix.misc
Subject: Re: Linux vs FreeBSD
Date: 16 Dec 1995 23:04:13 GMT
Organization: Intel Corporation, Hillsboro, Oregon, USA
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <4avj9d$geb@news.jf.intel.com>
References: <489kuu$rbo@pelican.cs.ucla.edu> <4aianr$52o@daffy.anetsrvcs.uwrf.edu> <4alnti$peo@sundog.tiac.net> <4aqjdq$217@solaria.cc.gatech.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: pdxcs145.intel.com
Xref: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au comp.os.linux.advocacy:30512 comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc:10578 comp.unix.advocacy:12250 comp.unix.misc:20125
In article <4aqjdq$217@solaria.cc.gatech.edu>,
Byron A Jeff <byron@cc.gatech.edu> wrote:
>You've missed two points.
>
>1) If you release a version 1.0 under GPL you can certainly privitize version
>1.1 and beyond. But you can't receind a license you grant even if you own
>the product licensed. You'd be obligated to support version 1.0 under the GPL.
>See alladin ghostscript as an example of this.
This is subtly wrong.
If you release version 1.0 under the GPL, *you* are not obligated to
"support" it (i.e. you are not obligated to make sources available for
three years, etc). Your *licensees* are obligated to follow the GPL's
terms if they wish to redistribute it.
But you can do anything you like, since you are the copyright holder.
The GPL is a license that gives others (people who aren't the copyright
holder) the opportunity to exercise certain rights (copying, etc) normally
available only to the copyright holder. Since you, the copyright holder,
already have those rights, you need no license to exercise them and hence
need not obey the provisions of the GPL. Others who wish to copy your
work have no automatic right to do so, unless granted by some form of
license (such as the GPL), so they must obey the terms of whatever license
they obtained their copy under.
In summary:
1. Releasing 1.0 under the GPL does not prevent you from privatizing 1.1.
However, you cannot rescind rights after they are granted under
the GPL [*], so you cannot prevent others from continuing to
redistribute the original GPL'd 1.0 version.
2. You do not incur any obligations by releasing your own work under
the GPL. In particular, you are not yourself bound by the GPL.
Others who redistribute your work are obligated to obey the GPL.
3. Privatizing GPL'd software can be difficult if multiple authors are
involved, since it involves either obtaining assignment of copyright
or agreement to new licensing terms from each author.
[*] Actually there is one circumstance under which you can terminate rights
granted under the GPL--that is if the licensee has failed to honor
the provisions of the GPL (see paragraph 4 of the GPL).