It is apparent that you understand that ownership of a copyright allows you to control its use, even if that control is to allow free use, but your statement has a major semantic flaw--
The words "precise" and "legal" are incompatible and should never be used in the same sentence. That's why we have so many lawyers, to debate (for fees) the differences among "shall be", "will be" ,"to be" and "is". Bill-W4BSG At 01:36 AM 1/14/2007, you wrote: >--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Simon Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >wrote: > > > I am *not* making it open source, only the decoding DLL's. The UI >will never > > be open source as it uses copyrighted code. > >Copyright and Open Source are not opposites. Copyright ownership is >the precise legal foundation of, for example, the General Public >License (GPL). > >There is a simple, concise discussion of the issues involved at ><http://www.gnu.org/copyleft/gpl.html>. > >73 >Frank >AB2KT > > > > > >Announce your digital presence via our DX Cluster >telnet://cluster.dynalias.org > >Our other groups: > >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/dxlist/ >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/contesting >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wnyar >http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Omnibus97 > > >Yahoo! Groups Links > > >
