@Vampier, I believe you and Benoit own the copyrights of the trainers so you can change the license at any time. You can also have one GPLed version available in for example source forge but change the license when you bundle them with an emulator (don't think openMSX team would like that though so they would probably grab the GPL version which is ok with the license). If this is something you want for the blueMSX release, let me know. If you want another license on the files when distributed in blueMSX both you and Benoit need to agree on the new license and then let me know and I'll update whatever files needs to be updated.

Vampier: I'm just stating how the GPL and BSD licenses work. I can't help that. Nothing has changed in any way, probably only your understanding of the license.
dvik: thanks for clearing that up. I guess he didn't grab it from CVS I guess this gives Vampier more legs to his chair So, the binary distribution from your site has a different license then, right?

Note: I don't like to play things formally, but, as everyone with SVN write access should know, openMSX is completely developed under the GPL, so everything submitted/committed to SVN is licensed under the GPL. OTOH, as we are a hobby project, we haven't signed contracts for this or something (which would be kind of absurd anyway). I think it's fair to assume that people who commit stuff to our SVN agree to license their material under the GPL, because that's the license of the whole project, as can be seen on the SF.net page and in the copyright statement of the source code.

GPL really only restricts what other people can do with your source code. The author of the source code can do what he want with it. blueMSX does however contain a small portion of GPLed code that is not developed by us (moonsound is one) and this probably has some impact but I'm not sure what.
All blueMSX source code developed by us are since a while back under GPL license. We switched from BSD to GPL I think about a year ago or so.
The gfx of blueMSX has a 'free for non commercial use' type license if I'm correct and I'm actually not sure under what license the machine configs are. Since Benoit made them I would guess its the same type of license as the gfx (don't think he wants them to be used commercially).

Ah, I didn't know you changed licenses. Why did you do so, anyway?

Of course you can always do what you want with your own stuff. But if you submit code to a GPL'ed project, isn't it fair to assume that you permit people to use that submitted code under the conditions of the GPL? (Of course you can also submit it somewhere else under different conditions, but that doesn't matter here.)