4

The present question is a special case of Can one take BSD licensed code and distribute it under GPL?.

Looking recently at OpenBSD's LibreSSL, I've noticed that SSLeay that it traces its roots to (through the OpenSSL lineage), has had the following addendum to what otherwise looks like the standard 4-clause BSD licence:

http://bxr.su/o/lib/libssl/src/crypto/objects/obj_dat.c#52

 *
 * The licence and distribution terms for any publically available version or
 * derivative of this code cannot be changed.  i.e. this code cannot simply be
 * copied and put under another distribution licence
 * [including the GNU Public Licence.]
 */
  • Is it or is it not a NOOP, considering the possible answers from the prior question? (Alas, the prior question has completely conflicting answers at this point!)

  • Why is GNU Public Licence specifically mentioned; isn't GPL already incompatible with the 4-clause BSD licence that precedes the above comment, due to the advertisement clause?

| improve this question | | | | |
  • 1
    What do you mean by NOOP? And as I say on all these questions, this question could perhaps get better answers at Open Source (this is no longer a request for migration, but just a reminder of the other site.) – curiousdannii Oct 19 '15 at 13:05
  • Oh god. Both FOS and your linked questions have officially confused me. – Zizouz212 Apr 13 '16 at 21:12
  • However, for your second questions, it seems as if this addendum is 1) Not part of the license or 2) is part of the license, but is not a BSD license 3) Not necessarily at all. – Zizouz212 Apr 13 '16 at 21:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.