4 ms·
> And since "you" means the licensee, wouldn't that mean the licensee can remove the additional terms added by the commons clause? No (the trial court has reas
by rectang 5y ago
> And since "you" means the licensee, wouldn't that mean the licensee can remove the additional terms added by the commons clause?
No (the trial court has reasoned), because the Commons Clause was introduced by the licensor. Thanks to that provision in the license, licensees can remove clauses introduced by other licensees, but cannot remove clauses introduced by the original licensor.
The original licensor is Neo4J, the copyright holder for the software, which has made it available under the license in question.
- aspenmayer 5y agoWouldn't the pre-Commons Clause software still be soley GPL v3? I thought that software cannot be retroactively re-licensed, so I'm not following your (or maybe the court's) reasoning. I think you and OP can both be right, but in the context of this case, OP's point is not relevant, if I'm understanding correctly?
- pabs3 5y agoThat part of the license doesn't say only restrictions added by licensees can be removed, just that any added restrictions can be removed.