Alexandre Oliva wrote:
2. You may [...] provided that you also meet all of these conditions
There's no room to interpret that as saying "or some other license
you found on some web page"
There's no denying of this possibility, and there couldn't be.
Welcome to the world of copyright. Seriously, do us all a favor, and
go talk to a lawyer. Ask the FSF.
The FSF has gone so far as to say that not only does everything included
in the work as a whole when distributed together have to be covered by
the GPL, by also anything that might conceivable be connected to create
a derived work, such as a library distributed separately.
> Read SFLC's position paper.
Only the specific copyright owner's position would matter.
Please stop spreading misinformation.
That's funny - remember this post is in response to my exact quote of
the license section 2b. Do you really consider what the license
actually say as misinformation?
--
Les Mikesell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@redhat.com
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
