ILIAS mix of GNU GPL with own terms

Alex Hudson home at
Mon May 28 07:34:45 UTC 2001

On Mon, May 28, 2001 at 12:33:24AM +0200, Frank Heckenbach wrote:
> > Vertragsgegenstand == contract?
> object of agreement

Hmmm. Sounds like there isn't really an English equivilent then :-)

> > Make your changes available to us free of charge. GPL states that any GPL
> > program you modify must be licenced at _no_ charge, i.e., for free.
> Nope. 

Er, yep. Derived works must be licensed as a _whole_ at _no_ charge under
the GPL (2b :). The GPL talks of charges at several junctures: each of
sections 1, 2, and 3 at least. If you're not the author of software, it's
impossible to charge for the software license.

(Note also we're only talking about the license here).

> The original authors may impose such restrictions on you because
> they're not bound by their license(*), but you may not impose these
> restrictions on others, so if the original authors would require you
> to do so, you may not redisitribute it at all, ยง7.

Maybe this is their cunning trick :)

Seriously though, the AGB says many times that the rights of the licensee
come from the GPL - the AGB is merely supposed to be a clarification of what
they understand the GPL to be, I don't know if it would take priority over
the GPL in a court (I would think not).



More information about the Discussion mailing list