Are the following license terms legal / legally enforceable for some code I
am thinking of giving to a few friends :
"License : Currently closed source, will be released under draft GPLv3
currently under discussion at FSF. The expectation is that the released
code will be used and distributed in w
Imagine the following scenario.
One of the BSDs copies some GPL'ed code and releases it under the BSD
license. True to form and history, Microsoft then copies that "BSD" code
into its own codebase and releases it under a proprietary license.
What happens legally now ? Isn't Microsoft the recipien
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Hello,
>
> My application consists of a collection of scripts (full source
> distributed) licensed under a license that I'll call A.
> I want to distribute with my application, the source version of a
> script licensed under GPL. This script (source) will be imported an
John Hasler wrote:
> Geico Caveman writes:
>> I agree that Microsoft would be very very serious trouble if they were
>> caught doing this but they can decide if they want to be caught doing it,
>> which makes the fear irrelevant.
>
> Does the phrase "whistle blo
Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
>> Same thing that stops most people from not stealing things from
>> your home: the law, and the repercussions of breaking said law.
>
>Irrelevant. The corresponding situation here would be if the thief
>broke into your house, copied your papers, and then
Linux Torvalds and many other respected people in the community are hung up
over the DRM provisions of GPL v3 draft. The rest is fine with them. In the
meantime, Moglen and others are trying to add some even more cast iron
features to the license that make the clear violation in spirit, and
probabl
Are there any guesstimates about illegal use of GPL'ed / LGPL'ed code by
vendors of proprietary software (like using such code in a proprietary
application that is released only as a binary) ?
This can happen both with and without the vendor's knowledge / approval.
Like deadline pressed programmer
