develooper Front page | perl.artistic2 | Postings from June 2006

Re: Artistic License 2.0 RC1

Thread Previous
From:
Nicholas Clark
Date:
June 3, 2006 05:56
Subject:
Re: Artistic License 2.0 RC1
Message ID:
20060603125532.GZ45236@plum.flirble.org
On Fri, Jun 02, 2006 at 06:09:41PM -0700, Allison Randal wrote:

> >Can I include code from a GPL v2 project? Why?
> 
> No, you can't include code from a GPL (1 or 2 or 3) project in an 
> Artistic licensed package. Because the Artistic License (1.0 or 2.0) is 

> >- This sucks if provision 13 prevents me from linking to GPL v2 libraries
> >  as there are many of them that are very useful, and unlikely to change 
> >  license.  
> 
> It doesn't prevent you from linking to GPL libraries (in any version). 
> It only prevents you from absorbing GPL code into a package and 
> distributing that GPL code under an Artistic License. (You couldn't do 
> this under Artistic 1.0 either.)

What wasn't said in as many words (but I think I'm correct here) is that
you can include code from a GPL (1 or 2 or 3) project with code from an
Artistic 2 project if and only if you redistribute the combined work under
the GPL (single licensed under the GPL). 
(Because that the Artistic License 2.0 permits you to take the code you
received under it and redistribute it onwards under the GPL).

Although to maintain your rights to continue redistributing (under the GPL)
the code you received under the Artistic License 2.0, you have to comply with
all provisions of the Artistic License 2.0 (such as provision 13).
In turn, am I right in thinking that if one is in compliance with all terms
of GPL 3, then one is also in compliance with all terms of the Artistic
License 2.0?

Please note I am neither Allison nor a lawyer.

Nicholas Clark


Thread Previous


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About