On 11/7/2012 11:08 AM, Richard Kenner wrote:
Correct. A court of competent jurisdiction can decide whether your scheme
conforms to the relevant licenses; neither licens...@fsf.org nor the
people on this list can.
A minor correction: licens...@fsf.org *could* determine that since they are
the copyright holders. If they say it's OK, that would be permitting such
a scheme. However, the FSF, as a matter of policy, *does not* respond to
queries about whether or not some scheme violates the GPL.
And why should they? Or why would they?
I believe in free software as a contribution to a better society and
believe in the use of licenses such as GPLv3 to promote software sharing
by providing a software commons that can be used by those who will
contribute their changes to that commons, and do not consider this list -
or any GNU Project list - an appropriate place to seek advice about how to
do things going against the spirit of that commons.
I very much agree!
Me too!
