> From: Leandro GFC Dutra
>
> Not necessarily... for example, take the KDE case. It is GPLd, ...
No, it is not, even if there is written so.
It is not GPL because GPL ensures that all GPLed program can be ported
to Windoze and sold as a statically linked binary file, without paying
*any*
Richard L. Alhama writes:
> What if the author died ?
Then his heirs own the copyright.
--
John HaslerThis posting is in the public domain.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Do with it what you will.
Dancing Horse Hill Make money from it if you can; I don't mind.
Elmwood,
> The point here is that even if theoretically possible, it can be very
> difficult to un-GPL a piece of code if you are not the sole author of
> it. If there are authors uncooperative with your will to change the
> licensing terms, or even too many authors, your program will be
> effectivel
Polacco Fabrizio (NTC/He) wrote:
>
> > From: Wojciech Zabolotny
> >
> > I thought, that the main goal of GPL license is to give a warranty that
> > the source of the software and derived works will be ALWAYS freely
> > available.
>
> You cannot see such warranty even in the GPL.
> The owner of t
> From: Wojciech Zabolotny
>
> I thought, that the main goal of GPL license is to give a warranty that
> the source of the software and derived works will be ALWAYS freely
> available.
> I can't see such warranty in the libdb2 license :-(.
> I hope I'm wrong.
You cannot see such warranty even in t
5 matches
Mail list logo
