Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+w=401wt.eu-S1753884AbXIPVLk@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S1753884AbXIPVLk (ORCPT <rfc822;w@1wt.eu>);
	Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:11:40 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752850AbXIPVLc
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:11:32 -0400
Received: from keil-draco.com ([216.193.185.50]:50137 "EHLO
	mail.keil-draco.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org
	with ESMTP id S1752445AbXIPVLc (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:11:32 -0400
From: Daniel Hazelton <dhazelton@enter.net>
To: Hannah Schroeter <hannah@schlund.de>
Subject: Re: Wasting our Freedom
Date: Sun, 16 Sep 2007 17:11:05 -0400
User-Agent: KMail/1.9.6
Cc: Adrian Bunk <bunk@kernel.org>, "Can E. Acar" <can.acar@pro-g.com.tr>,
       misc@openbsd.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
       Eben Moglen <moglen@softwarefreedom.org>,
       Lawrence Lessig <lessig_from_web@pobox.com>,
       "Bradley M. Kuhn" <bkuhn@softwarefreedom.org>,
       Matt Norwood <norwood@softwarefreedom.org>
References: <46ED7A8F.1020304@pro-g.com.tr> <20070916195909.GA18232@stusta.de> <20070916203926.GA17863@schlund.de>
In-Reply-To: <20070916203926.GA17863@schlund.de>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
  charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline
Message-Id: <200709161711.05836.dhazelton@enter.net>
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1635
Lines: 40

On Sunday 16 September 2007 16:39:26 Hannah Schroeter wrote:
> Hi!
>
> On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 09:59:09PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >On Sun, Sep 16, 2007 at 11:48:47AM -0700, Can E. Acar wrote:
> >>...
> >> First, these developers got questionable advice from senior Linux kernel
> >> developers, and SLFC (which is closely related to FSF) in the process.
> >
> >The most questionable legal advice in this thread was by Theo de Raadt
> >who claimed choosing one licence for _dual-licenced_ code was illegal...
>
> JFTR, I do *not* think that that assessment was questionable. Unless the
> dual-licensing *explicitly* allows relicensing, relicensing is forbidden
> by copyright law. The dual-licensing allows relicensing only if that's
> *explicitly* stated, either in the statement offering the alternative, or
> in one of the licenses.

That advice wasn't regarding relicensing. Dual-licensed code allows 
distribution and use under either license. If I get BSD/GPL code, I can 
follow the GPL exclusively and I don't have to follow the BSD license at all. 
And the alternative is also true. (ie: follow the BSD license exclusively and 
ignore the GPL)

It's not "relicensing" - it's following *WHICH* of the offered terms are more 
agreeable.

I'll just snip the rest, since you seem confused.

<snip>

DRH

-- 
Dialup is like pissing through a pipette. Slow and excruciatingly painful.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/