> This means that a copyright owner can allow their code to be
> used under multiple licensing terms. For instance, you can
> distribute code that you wrote under *both* the GPL *and*
> the BSD license. This only requires that you insist that others
> who send code changes to you also agree to place their code under
> the terms of both licenses.
Ok. Maybe this could be a way out of this lockup.
> >It's possible to retain this current copyright in the driver also in
> >future. It's not completely out of question to start distributing it
> >under GPL in future. However I just wonder if we are living in communism
> >where just one ideology is accepted.
>
> Please don't raise that straw man, Hannu. I never said that the GPL
Ok. I will not do it any more.
> that is included with the kernel *must* be *compatible* with the
> GPL. That is, it must have a license which does not require other
> restrictions beyond those in the GPL. It can *also* be licensed
> under terms that do have other restrictions, but as long as the user
> has the option of using the GPL or a compatible license, things are
> just fine.
Good.
Best regards,
Hannu
-----------------------------
Hannu Savolainen (hannu@voxware.pp.fi, hannu@4front-tech.com)
http://personal.eunet.fi/pp/voxware/hannu.html (my home page)
http://www.4Front-Tech.com/uss.html (UNIX Sound System (USS))
http://personal.eunet.fi/pp/voxware (USS Lite/TASD/VoxWare)