This is one of the rare occasions where I think Theo is right

Posted Sep 4, 2007 16:23 UTC (Tue) by sayler (guest, #3164)
In reply to: This is one of the rare occasions where I think Theo is right by cate
Parent article: Relicensing: what's legal and what's right

So.. is this based on any actual LEGAL grounds?

to post comments

This is one of the rare occasions where I think Theo is right

Posted Sep 4, 2007 16:41 UTC (Tue) by cate (subscriber, #1359) [Link] (1 responses)

IANAL ;-) but I think I read something about this in license-discuss@opensource.org . Anyway how a person who doesn't own the copyright could change a license of the file? (removing a license is like changing a license: you change how the source are redistributed). Do you see something like this in any license?

BTW the single license on a file is not necessary the same as the aggregate license of a program (source), and it not the same as the license of the generated binary program. So it is ok that your program or your binary is only GPL licensed, but no part of the common licenses allow you to relicense an existing file.

This is one of the rare occasions where I think Theo is right

Posted Sep 7, 2007 23:12 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (guest, #1954) [Link]

Anyway how a person who doesn't own the copyright could change a license of the file? (removing a license is like changing a license: you change how the source are redistributed)

Don't confuse a copyright license with the text describing the license. Nobody can "remove" someone else's license -- it's simply not possible -- but one can remove the text describing the license from the file.

(Similarly, one can add text to a Microsoft product saying, "you may copy this as you please," but it doesn't mean a recipient of it has a license to copy it).

Removing the text does not change or eliminate the license; it just keeps people from being aware of it. The author of open source code wants all recipients to know they have his permission to copy it, hence he sets as a condition of copying the code that the copier copy it with the license text intact.

(I think in the BSD case, the author also wants to make sure every recipient of the code knows that the author disclaims liability for any mistakes he made in the code).