Hi, Christian Rose wrote: > mån 2003-05-12 klockan 09.33 skrev David Neary: > > To be quite honest, I think this is GNU throwing a hissy fit > > because BSD people don't agree with them. I believe that any > > challenge to the licencing of code as GPL because it contains BSD > > code would fail. > > I doubt that, as the revised BSD license without the advertizing clause > has been deemed perfectly compatible with the GPL > (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/license-list.html#GPLCompatibleLicenses). > Clearly, it's the advertising clause that causes problems. Ah. That clears things up. Almost all of the questionable code (including the gif code, and the nlfilt code) is not BSD licenced in the old sense, only in the new sense. It does not require a notice on all materials, and resembles more the X11 licence, or the artistic licence V. 2.0 - in which case, it seems to me like we can steamroller through this problem, and do as I suggested (GPL all the files in question, leaving in the comment from the original author). Or am I missing something? > > I don't see a problem with it. And, to be honest, anyone who > > considers adding a comment to the top of a source file a > > restriction is being seriously pedantic. > > I thought I had already mentioned that this isn't only about source file > comments (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/bsd.html)... To be honest, if > you have problems with the original BSD license and GPL incompatibility, > I suggest you bring it up on a GNU mailing list. Or any other list with > legal experts. This discussion has little to do with GIMP. As I said above, the code in question doesn't have the 'obnoxious advertising clause' in it. Does this mean that we can relicence it, and stay GPL compliant? As you suggest, I'm going to cc a GNU person here. > You're free to cc: me directly on such a discussion, but I don't think > the GIMP mailing list is the right forum. Unfortunately, since we're talking about the licencing of code distributed with the GIMP, this is still an appropriate forum. Changing the subject name, though. Cheers, Dave. -- David Neary, Lyon, France E-Mail: bolsh@xxxxxxxx
