On Jun 15, 2007, Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> wrote:

quoted text
> On Fri, Jun 15, 2007 at 03:18:24PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>> On Jun 15, 2007, Al Viro <viro@ftp.linux.org.uk> wrote:
>> 
>> > *OR* inherits the default license of the project.
>> 
>> You got any case law for this?  Seriously, I could use this for
>> FSFLA's IRPF2007-Livre project.
>> http://fsfla.org/svnwiki/blogs/lxo/pub/freeing-the-lion

quoted text
> Umm...  What other license choices are there?

Where does it say that there must be one?

quoted text
> No specific case law, but I'd expect serious [eventual] trouble for
> somebody trying to slap some different license in such case.

Consider this (to make the freeing-the-lion story short):

  Jar file with .class files, with a copy of LGPL in the root of the
  tree.  No other license anywhere to be seen.  Is it safe to assume
  the whole thing is under the LGPL?

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
FSF Latin America Board Member         http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
-
unsubscribe notice
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/