On Jun 23, 2006, at 8:36 AM, Nandalal Gunaratne wrote: > What type of open source licence is likely to be used for these > implementations? "Public Domain" is a bit tricky on the legal > front, as legally it is owned by the US Public, and therefore, the > US government. They could refuse certain countries the free use of > VistA for political reasons for example?
Not being a lawyer, I'll ask a naive question: It's one thing to choose to license your own work under GPL, but why would anyone think they could make another person's work into something licensed under GPL? If they can, is it right? (Okay, that's two questions.) Gregory Woodhouse [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Judge a man by his questions not his answers." --Voltaire [Non-text portions of this message have been removed] ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Yahoo! Groups gets a make over. See the new email design. http://us.click.yahoo.com/XISQkA/lOaOAA/yQLSAA/W4wwlB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/openhealth/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
