GPL Violation?

[ard]

On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 06:37:03PM +0200, rolf.freitag at email.de wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 08, 2008 at 08:25:07AM -0400, jieryn at gmail.com wrote:
> > > Is this legal?
> > 
> > If it is his code, he can license it as he pleases.
> 
> yes, but he can't remove the GPL from the code; if it 
> was GPL code it will always be GPL code.

There is no such thing as GPL code.
If nobody has a copy of the code licensed under GPL, then the
code licensed under GPL dies a lonely death.

> That's the reason why some people do say that GPL 
> is a virus and why some open source projects like Truecrypt
> can't join the licenses of all source code parts, becuause 
> they have other incompatible licenses.

Well, that's exactly why GPL is non viral and most commercial
licenses are viral. It's mostly the point of view of the FUD
spreader.

> So you can't  remove the GPL but you can write new
> files with other licenses.

As an author you can license code anyway you want

> GPLing Code means donating to the public and you can't
> invert this because that would mean that you would claim 
> public property.

No, it means licensing your code to another according to a
specific license. Only this license garantuees you and the
receiver of the license specific freedoms instead of taking them
away.
As the author you are still allowed to license your code to
anybody else under whatever restriction.

> That would be like donating money to a non-profit association
> like greenpeace and to claim it back several months later.

If you haven't donated (by licensing the code to someone under
GPL), then there is nothing to ask back.

If I put some code up, and license it under GPL to anyone who
downloads it, and after a week I decide not to license the code
under GPL anymore, then I can do so. If nobody has downloaded the
code in the meanwhile, then there is no GPL'd version of the
code.