LMAO... A BSD replacement for BusyBox under a BSD license.
From ROB LANDLEY no less:
"Toybox is released under a simple 2-clause BSD-style license."
http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Controversy-around-Busybox-alternative-1426119.html
http://www.itwire.com/opinion-and-analysis/open-sauce/
Hyman Rosen wrote:
On 4/15/2010 9:43 AM, RJack wrote:
The statement ". . . (a) Plaintiffs’ copyrights are unique and
valuable property whose market value is impossible to assess, . .
." automatically establishes the fact that any alleged injury is
"conjectural and hypothetical". The SFLC lawyer
can we all please stop talking in parables and references to topics we
may not all share the detailed background knowledge of? I'd like a
straight answer with the entire answer within the text.
is the GPL basically not enforceable assuming you "work around" it
technically by the aforementioned me
> Then you are not copying or distributing foo and so its license does not
> impinge upon you.
Well, doesn't this just seem like a total legal loophole in the GPL?
What if i don't even ask the user to press a button, what if i just,
upon install, as part of the install, just download and install t
> "Notwithstanding the provisions of section 106(3) [17 USC 106(3)], the
> owner of a particular copy or phonorecord lawfully made under this
> title, or any person authorized by such owner, is entitled, without the
> authority of the copyright owner, to sell or otherwise dispose of the
> possessio
> Yes. Note, however, that you will be distributing foo and will have to
> comply with the terms of its license.
allright how bout if i have the user go and install said tool and i do
NOT include it with my distribution? in my app, say the user invokes
that funtion, i can detect if "foo" is ins
say there's a GPL'd command line exec "foo" that does some nifty
function
and i've got a program which does something that wants to use what
"foo" can do.
i've not changed any code in "foo", i simply want to use the binary.
can i distribute the original unmodified binary "foo" with my
proprietary s
Okay, all these GNU licenses are a bit confusing as far as I'm
concerned. I think I've got a decent under standing of the GPL and LGPL
since I've used them, but my latest project will use the FDL. The
project is a "book" on ancient history, of which the specifics of
aren't important for this questi
