| 1 |
I'm a bit worried if we should really go down that path. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Not because I have issues with GPL2+ (I'm usually happy with |
| 4 |
everything that makes licensing more flexible), but because I'm worried |
| 5 |
we're creating a legal minefield. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Think about this: You may ask me if you can relicense all the ebuilds |
| 8 |
I've ever written as GPL2+. I'll say yes. Though ask me if you can |
| 9 |
relicense all the ebuilds I've ever committed? Well... They came from |
| 10 |
bug reports, overlays, heavily edited by other people, and I have no way |
| 11 |
of tracking that. I added them under the implicit assumption that |
| 12 |
someone who has submitted such an ebuild to bugzilla or to an overlay |
| 13 |
with the gentoo/gpl2 copyright line in it would implicitly agree that |
| 14 |
they would be redistributed under those conditions. IANAL, but I think |
| 15 |
that's a fair assumption. But do all these people that created or |
| 16 |
contributed to the ebuilds I ever committed agree to a |
| 17 |
GPL2+-relicensing? No idea, probably not. Is their work relevant enough |
| 18 |
to have a license at all? IANAL. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
*If* Gentoo decides to go this relicensing way I'd recommend to only do |
| 21 |
that if it's coordinated with organizations that have deep legal |
| 22 |
knowledge of these issues (e.g. like software freedom conservancy) and |
| 23 |
if some lawyers that know this stuff well approve the plan. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Hanno Böck |
| 27 |
https://hboeck.de/ |
Archives