News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Theo de Raadt on LLVM license change. Parent comment

Re:Theo de Raadt on LLVM license change by johncolanduoni on Saturday October 01, 2016 @01:56PM (#12619040)
You can't make the original code not-MIT-licensed, since the author already released it as such (and even they cannot make it not-MIT-licensed). But you can release it (with or without modifications) under another license as long as it lets you follow the MIT license's only restriction (reproduction of the copyright notice).

What do you think being GPL-compatible (for example) means other than that? The GPL requires you to release all parts of the derived work under the GPL, not just a compatible license.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Theo de Raadt on LLVM license change by protomyth on Saturday October 01, 2016 @02:38PM (#12619251)
> You can't make the original code not-MIT-licensed

Yes, that's what I was saying.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Theo de Raadt on LLVM license change by ricardobeat on Saturday October 01, 2016 @03:46PM (#12619579)
Actually you are saying different things. Even thought the original code will still be forever available under MIT, you can, for example, sell it under a proprietary license (without changing a line of code) to whoever is willing to pay for that.
[ Parent | on HN ]