Re: [DotGNU]New Mozilla Licensing terms?

[Matthew Copeland]

Well, mozilla has been licensed under the GPL for a while now.  The real
problem comes about for browsers with IE, since they are no longer
supporting Netscape-style plugins.  Since linking a GPLed plugin or
ActiveX control against IE is questionable with regards to the legality,
this still presents the problem with the browsers.  (Of course, there
wouldn't be a problem with mozilla, except that you would have to
tiple-licesne the patch under the MPL/GPL/LPGL.

Matthew M. Copeland

On Thu, 20 Sep 2001, John wrote:

> Many moons ago, I remember a question of whether we are limitted to
> supporting browsers through plugins/Active-X or whether we could in fact
> hack the code, of say Mozilla, to support DotGNU? I believe the comment
> was never answered or was answered on the basis of license
> incompatibilities. This second possibility (my memory is bad on what the
> answer was) may now be a moot point?
> 
> Mozilla is to be relicensed under the NPL + GPL/LGPL. This opens up the
> code for closer integration with DotGNU, does it not? Instedad of
> looking to add code at the public level, we can add code at the patch
> level.
> 
> http://www.mozilla.org/MPL/relicensing-faq.html
> 
> Perhaps, if done carefully we could create a reasonable DotGNU client
> from a fork of the mozy codebase? I seem to remember a project on Mozdev
> that allowed arbitrary protocols to be added and supported by Mozy;
> perhaps this is where we could add RLS: support?
> 
> John Le'Brecage
> _______________________________________________
> Developers mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://subscribe.dotgnu.org/mailman/listinfo/developers
>