Is dual-licensing a possibility? #40

tufty opened this Issue Jun 14, 2012 · 8 comments


None yet
6 participants

tufty commented Jun 14, 2012

I was looking at #38, and it occurs to me that the vchiq code would probably be extremely useful to me. However, I'm working under the BSD license rather than the GPL; would it be envisagable to have dual GPLv2/BSD licensing in order to make things easier for stuff like this?

My own project is distinctly "minority appeal", but getting as many features as possible into, for example, a *BSD port would seem like a reasonable goal, and dual-licensing would permit this




popcornmix commented Jun 26, 2012

I believe we will get all released code BSD licensed (in addition to GPL v2 if required).
Might take a little while to get headers updated, but it is agreed in principal.

tufty commented Jun 27, 2012

That's great news. Thanks

I'll wait for the headers to be updated before incorporating any code, if you could comment here when it's done (no hurry, obviously) and I'll close the issue.

rosery commented Jul 19, 2012

Hi @raspberrypi and @popcornmix

Is there any more info on an ETA for BSD licenced VCHIQ source? It would be rather helpful to be able to get working on it asap as it is really needed for more than a basic mouse, and for sound support

Many thanks

emaste commented Nov 20, 2012

It should be fine to apply only a 2- or 3-clause BSD license (as I see on the userland repo), since it's simpler and avoids the potential issues arising out of dual-licensing.

Count me in as interested. And yes, I agree -- it should just be the 2- or 3-clause BSD license, much simpler for everyone that way.


popcornmix commented Dec 17, 2012

Broadcom vchiq code is now dual BSD/GPL licenced on "next" tree.

popcornmix closed this Dec 17, 2012

emaste commented Dec 17, 2012

For future reference: raspberrypi/linux@d21d26e

gonzoua commented Dec 18, 2012

Thanks a lot!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment