From: | Peter Galbavy <peter(dot)galbavy(at)knowtion(dot)net> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com |
Cc: | Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Magnus Hagander <mha(at)sollentuna(dot)net>, Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Table Spaces |
Date: | 2004-05-19 18:21:07 |
Message-ID: | 40ABA593.7080508@knowtion.net |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com wrote:
> I'm probably just being alarmist, but think about some IP lawyer buying up
> the entity that owns the GPL code, and suing end user's of PostgreSQL.
You cannot retrospectively change the terms of a license unless the
licensee agrees to it. If something is released GPL, then the GPL
applies to that code and subsequent derivatives - that's the point of
the GPL.
The new "owner" may change the terms of a license for new distributions
of a package, assuming they actually own all the IP, and this is what I
understand is the SCO issue. SCO claim that code that was distributed
was done so without permission.
For an opposite effect, see the origins of the OpenSSH project; to
summarise, folks found than an older version of a (at that time) vaguely
licensed ssh was BSD licensed ans it was used as a base for a new
product - namely OpenSSH.
rgds,
--
Peter
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Hans-Jürgen Schönig | 2004-05-19 18:32:45 | Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion |
Previous Message | Magnus Hagander | 2004-05-19 18:04:49 | Re: Call for 7.5 feature completion |