> change the license. Alternatively, she can go back to the pristine > source which she originally single-handedly created and re-license > that, but she loses all the innovation that the community made, and the > community product remains under GPL anyway.
Won't it be complex? Once a part of the code is relicensed, the remaining part may become unusable. Also, in this case, the programmer has changed the license in such a way that it allows Apple to build on a GPL software and not keep their modifications open source. In fact, the way the exception is worded, it would be possible for any company to pay up a fee to this programmer and have their name included in the list of parties that are excluded from provisions of GPL. Imagine Microsoft doing that!! Buying "license exception" from all the GPL software they are interested in, do some cosmetic changes, close it and call it theirs!! In some cases, they may even be able to use free software to actually kick free software out of the scene. Sounds dangerous. Vikas _______________________________________________ ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd Archives at: http://news.gmane.org/gmane.user-groups.linux.delhi http://www.mail-archive.com/ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org/
