On Sun, Mar 16, 2014 at 11:18:46AM -0400, Adam Saunders wrote:
DISCLAIMER: This email does not contain legal advice. This email also
does not establish a solicitor-client relationship. You should
neither take nor fail to take any action based on any information
in this email. If you have a legal issue, then retain legal counsel.
The copyright holder appears to be stating that you can't take the
code, remove the BSD-3 license, and replace the BSD License with a
GPL or LGPL license. If that's so, that's correct. One CAN
incorporate code licensed under the 3-clause BSD license into GPLed
programs, but one MUST include the 3-clause BSD license text when
one distributes such combined code.
However, there is some ambiguity in the sentence you've noted with
regard to the intent of the copyright holder. Perhaps it would be
worthwhile to contact that person to get a written clarification?
Similar language is at the end of the SSLeay half of the OpenSSL license:
The licence and distribution terms for any publically available
derivative of this code cannot be changed. i.e. this code cannot simply be
copied and put under another distribution licence
[including the GNU Public Licence.]
On 03/16/2014 03:40 AM, Remi Collet wrote:
>Reviewing an old package  , I notice the LICENSE text (BSD-3) from
>the headers  includes:
>This code cannot simply be copied and put under the GNU Public License
>or any other GPL-like (LGPL, GPL2) License.
>Is it acceptable ?
>If not... will have to drop this package from fedora...
>legal mailing list
legal mailing list