[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: relicensing from MIT to LGPL

From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: relicensing from MIT to LGPL
Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 23:44:16 +0200 wrote:
> > You may NOT replace the MIT license
> > with the LGPL.
> Hm. I'm confused. The MIT license
> ( on the one hand
> says you may "sublicense" (re-license?) the code, but OTOH says,

Sublicense doesn't mean "relicense" under the any terms you like. It 
just means that you, as a licensee, got the permission to enter into 
a contract with other parties (and sue those licensees for breach of 
contract) conveying rights reserved to copyright owner(s) under the 
terms of the MIT license.

> "[snip] this permission notice shall be included in all copies or
> substantial portions of the Software."
> So, if you must include that "permission notice", does that mean the
> code must by definition be licensed under those terms (i.e. the MIT
> license)?



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]