Licensing change: Audacious - GPLv3 --> BSD

[Seth Johnson]

You need to get the permission of everyone who contributed code to the
GPL'd codebase, to convert to the BSD license.  Not sure I can comment
on translations.  It's far easier to convert from BSD to GPL,
specifically because the BSD is so permissive.  One theoretically
supposes somebody might have contributed a snippet of code so minimal
as not to constitute original expression, but people don't really want
to go into those considerations when they contemplate converting from
one code license to another.  The GPL is really for keeping code from
being casually converted to other licenses.


Seth



On Mon, Jul 9, 2012 at 3:30 PM, Tom Callaway <tcallawa at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 07/09/2012 03:21 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> and arbitrary other people, who get their patch contributions merged,
>>> > don't gain any copyright protection on the file or the proper parts of it,
>> I don't think this is true.
>
> Agreed. It is my opinion that this is not the case, assuming that the
> changes are substantial enough to be copyrightable.
>
> I'm otherwise refraining from comment on this thread, because it is
> unclear as to whether translations are copyrightable or not.
>
> ~tom
>
> ==
> Fedora Project
>
>
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel