On Sun, Sep 02, 2007 at 11:17:40AM +0200, Siegbert Marschall wrote: > > On Sat, Sep 01, 2007 at 04:55:34PM -0600, Theo de Raadt wrote: > >> > The license is not an alternative. The alternative is between two > >> licenses. > >> > > >> > The moment one chooses one them... it's that one henceforth. > >> > >> And... you are a judge? > > > > Theo, be as unreasonable as you want. > > > > The copyright notice tells the user he can choose between two licenses. > > If you choose the GNU GPL vs, you can't later on change to BSD or > > proprietary for that would be a copyright violation. > > > > *Copyright notice != license* > no. the copyright notice tells you that you can use GPL2 for distribution, > not that you can "choose" it.
Maybe my choice of words wasn't clear enough. The copyright notice tells you that *alternatively* (this means if you don't want to use the BSD) under the terms of the GNU GPL v2. Alternative implies choice, you choose which alternative you want. Rui -- Fnord. Today is Setting Orange, the 26th day of Bureaucracy in the YOLD 3173 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...?
