[Box Backup] Box Backup licensing

Chris Wilson chris at qwirx.com
Sat Jan 23 12:12:33 GMT 2010


Hi Ben,

On Sat, 23 Jan 2010, Ben Summers wrote:
> Chris Wilson wrote:
>> Ben, would you object to dual-licensing the core libraries under BSD/GPL
>> at the choice of the licensee? That way, we can distribute Box Backup as
>> pure GPL, but anyone wanting to use the core libraries could choose to use
>> them under the BSD license instead.
>
> I have no objection to dual-licensing the core libraries under BSD and 
> GPL v2 (and future versions) on the condition that the project asks any 
> contributors to the core libraries to dual-license their contributions.

That's absolutely fine by me. Although we never had a formal relicensing 
process (or a formal copyright assignment for that matter), I think it's 
safe to assume that if someone's contributions are merged into a file 
bearing a particular copyright and license, and they submitted the 
contributions with the intention that this merge should happen, then they 
have implicitly agreed to the copyright assignment and license. Does 
anyone disagree?

I'm going to go ahead with the relicensing as discussed, assuming that the 
outcome of any discussions about copyright assignment and licensing of 
contributions is orthogonal to the actual licenses on the files.

Cheers, Chris.
-- 
_ ___ __     _
  / __/ / ,__(_)_  | Chris Wilson <0000 at qwirx.com> - Cambs UK |
/ (_/ ,\/ _/ /_ \ | Security/C/C++/Java/Perl/SQL/HTML Developer |
\ _/_/_/_//_/___/ | We are GNU-free your mind-and your software |



More information about the Boxbackup mailing list