Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 4th Jun 2010 22:36 UTC
Google When Google first unveiled its WebM project, there were quite some concerns over its license. This license was incompatible with version 2 and 3 of the GPL, and was effectively a new license, causing unnecessary confusion. Google has now cleared everything up by switching to a regular BSD license.
Permalink for comment 428511
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[11]: GPL
by dbolgheroni on Mon 7th Jun 2010 03:37 UTC in reply to "RE[10]: GPL"
dbolgheroni
Member since:
2007-01-18

They agree that the original work must constitue a significant part of the new derived work. If the original work doesn't constitue a significant part of the new work, then the new work is not "based on" the original at all, and is therefore not a derivative work.


I don't care what the definition says. But I suggest you, a GPL specialist, to send an e-mail to Richard Stallman. He probably doesn't know this.

This is basic copyright law. It has nothing whatsoever to do with what someone like Stallman may or may not think.


We were talking about GPL, and GPL works this way. Period. Get yourself informed.

Reply Parent Score: 0