[sword-devel] Closed source exploitation of open source works (a GPL loophole)

[Chris Little]

> Can you relicense a GPL program under anything other than GPL? I
> though the
> GPL insured everyone (programmers and end users alike) that their
> "freedoms"
> could not be revoked. Another license may take these freedoms away,
> therefore in vioation of the GPL. Just a question, I am new to the GPL. I
> have read it and re-read it, but I still don't always get what it
> is saying.
> There is an article in "Open" magazine this month about the GPL license. I
> found it to be very interesting.

We can dual-license at the very least, if we want to make Sword more open
(LGPL, BSD, Artistic, etc.).  And I'm fairly certain we could license future
versions under other-than-GPL, assuming copyright holder consent was given,
simply because copyright holders have a right to do what they want with
their own property.  You can't put the genie back into the bottle, but you
can prevent genie 2.0 from getting out in the first place.  We might want to
consider forcing all code submitters to give their copyright over to
CrossWire to avoid needing everyone's individual permission (unless this is
already done; I'll admit I haven't checked headers) though this doesn't
solve problems with outside contributions like GNU Regex.

> > Should I just pretend I didn't write it and delete it from my hard drive
> >so that we don't have to deal with the issue at all? :)
>
> LOL :)

Too late for that now, actually.  It's in CVS.

> BTW Anyone going to Linux World here in San Francisco, CA this year in
> August?

I might if I can take time off.
In the same vein, is anyone going to JavaOne, also in SF?

--Chris