Re: [PATCH] ath5k - License clarification

[Sam Leffler <sam@errno.com>]

Luis R. Rodriguez wrote:
> Adding some other copyright holders to the CC list
>
>   Luis
>
> On 8/31/07, Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@gmail.com> wrote:
>   
>> Attached patch amends the ath5k license as per review from SFLC with
>> the following changes:
>>
>>   * Makes sure that Reyk's copyright and license notice appears
>>     correctly in each file that was derived from his work.
>>
>>   * Makes sure that Jiri's changes were released under a permissive,
>>     modified-BSD license, as he indicated that was his preference.
>>
>>   * Makes sure that Nick's changes were released under
>>     GPLv2-or-later, as he indicated that was his preference.
>>
>>   * Makes sure that all files clearly have the any GPL notices on
>>     top, but include the proper BSD-like notices below when required.
>>
>>    * Adds Devicescape attribution to ath5k_base.c
>>
>>   * Sets the MODULE_LICENSE to GPL, because with Nick's changes
>>     included under only GPL, the module can only be available under GPL.
>>
>>   * Adds Nick to the list of MODULE_AUTHORs because his changes
>>     are substantial.
>>
>> Signed-Off-By: Bradley M. Kuhn <bkuhn@softwarefreedom.org>
>> Signed-Off-By: Matt Norwood <norwood@softwarefreedom.org>
>> Signed-Off-By: Richard Fontana <fontana@softwarefreedom.org>
>> Signed-Off-By: Karen Sandler <karen@softwarefreedom.org>
>>
>> Acked-by: Luis R. Rodriguez <mcgrof@gmail.com>
>> Acked-by: Jiri Slaby <jirislaby@gmail.com>
>> Acked-by: Nick Kossifidis <mickflemm@gmail.com>
>>
>> Thanks to the SFLC for their help with this driver from legal hell
>>     

For the record, I told Jiri and various other folks that any code I 
licensed as dual-BSD/GPL could be made GPL only so long as the 
attribution remained.  That was the exact reason I dual-licensed.

    Sam