El lun, 15-09-2003 a las 04:56, James Henstridge escribió: > On 15/09/2003 3:26 AM, Carlos Perelló Marín wrote: > > > But if you have a mix of GPL and LGPL code, and it's not separated as > > > >libraries, automaticly all code is GPL, that's the "problem". The fact > >is that if they are the code owners, it's just that the code they are > >releasing has a dual license, LGPL and GPL. > > > > > The combined work must be licensed under the GPL because of the single > GPL component. However, the individual files can have other licenses, > as long as they are compatible with the GPL. The LGPL license is > definitely GPL compatible. > > As it stands, someone could take the release, remove the playlist and > they would be left with only LGPL code. They would be in their rights > to treat the remainder that way too. > > There doesn't seem to be any problem here. That's why I said "problem" instead of problem :-P Cheers. > > James. -- Carlos Perelló Marín Debian GNU/Linux Sid (PowerPC) Linux Registered User #121232 mailto:carlos pemas net || mailto:carlos gnome org http://carlos.pemas.net Valencia - Spain
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Esta parte del mensaje =?ISO-8859-1?Q?est=E1?= firmada digitalmente