Why is Fedora not a Free GNU/Linux distributions?
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
Mon Jul 21 03:36:38 UTC 2008
Alexandre Oliva wrote:
> On Jul 20, 2008, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> probably no one would bother to prove the lineage knowing that an
>> identical non-GPL'd copy existed.
>
> And, even if one did, AFAIK the copyright over the code in question is
> held solely by the party who first offered it under a more permissive
> license, so why would she bother to enforce a less permissive license,
> even if she could? But then, IANAL.
Agreed that there is next to no chance for enforcement in such a case,
but does your reading of the GPL not indicate that non-GPL distribution
of copies of anything ever covered by its work-as-a-whole provision is
prohibited? I don't see any escape clause. Separately packaged
dual-licensed packages might leave the choice of subsequent
redistribution up to the recipient, but I don't see any provision for
snipping a function out of covered code and re-using it in a way the GPL
would not permit.
--
Les Mikesell
lesmikesell at gmail.com
More information about the fedora-list
mailing list