2009/7/27 Jörn Nettingsmeier <netti...@folkwang-hochschule.de>: > which means that raymond has a point. and he is also entitled to forking > your project any way he sees fit.
It isn't necessarily the case that he is entitled to fork it. Raymond has repeatedly said that it was distributed to him without a GPL license. If a program is distributed to you under some proprietary terms, but it uses some GPL code, then it is presumably violating the terms of the GPL and so should not have been distributed. Possible remedies depending on the circumstances might include GPL'ing the program or ceasing distribution. But these are remedies between that program's distributors and the authors of the GPL'd code; the recipients of the improperly licensed program can't make any such remedy themselves. You can't just decide unilaterally that the ostensibly proprietary code was improperly licensed and so go and copy it to all your friends. In this case, the situation is probably moot since Bob has said he intended to publish under the GPL from the outset, but I think that is the only thing that might make this action defensible. Chris _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list Linux-audio-dev@lists.linuxaudio.org http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev