2013/6/24 Boudewijn Rempt
<boud@valdyas.org>
No, the license is everybodies concern. If you want to share code from tupi with, for instance, Krita, the license has to be (L)GPLv2+, or compatible. Your license is your interface to the rest of the floss community.
But in fact, if you didn't have a clear (written, email is ok) OK from all previous developers as well as Monica (if they are copyright holders of
code currently in Tupi) to relicense to GPLv3, then you're already in deep
problems with your codebase.
As far as I understood, the agreement between Toonka (in that time, the Monica's company) and the developers was
that the whole rights of the project would belong to Toonka, even when the chosen license was GPL.
KTooN wasn't a "normal" free software project. It wasn't about a community sharing and creating code, it was about a
company working on a free source code application.
Note: when I did the change of license from v2 to v3, I did it with the support/knowledge of Monica.
I understand if I have to talk to Monica to deal with this issue, but legally, should I talk to the old developers?