Difference between revisions of "Thread:Talk:RWPCL/Ball of Wax/reply"
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
At least, that is as I understand it. | At least, that is as I understand it. | ||
| − | So Rednaxela is in the clear, as is Etna/Scarlet. | + | So Rednaxela is in the clear, as is Etna/Scarlet. But I do have to change Nene's license until such time I remove all RWPCL code from it, even then the older version of the code would still be RWPCL, as it contains Raiko's Gun (which is licensed under the RWPCL). |
Revision as of 22:06, 15 November 2012
Actually under reading up on copyright law. As the copyright holder of the additional code. I can chose to redistribute that code under a more or less restrictive license as long as it does not contain any incompatibly licensed code within its whole, regardless of any and all clauses defined within said licenses (including a strong copyleft). However if any of the code that I am not the copyright holder of, were to remain then the it would be unlawful for me to release it under any license that violates its license.
At least, that is as I understand it.
So Rednaxela is in the clear, as is Etna/Scarlet. But I do have to change Nene's license until such time I remove all RWPCL code from it, even then the older version of the code would still be RWPCL, as it contains Raiko's Gun (which is licensed under the RWPCL).
