If those threats were not serious, then I'll post a version linked to
ftd2xx too - it's still better on Windows, and I don't think this is
going to change any time soon.
IANAL, but stating your intentions publicly to violate the GPL license
does not improve your standing in any way...
The
I've recently wrote that I know of 4 GPL violations (distributing OpenOCD with
ftd2xx library). Make that 5 now... Since there are NO activities from the most
dedicated GPL-fans, than maybe I'll just post such version on my webpage too?
4\/3!!
___
-Original Message-
From: openocd-development-boun...@lists.berlios.de [mailto:openocd-
development-boun...@lists.berlios.de] On Behalf Of
freddie_cho...@op.pl
Sent: donderdag 8 april 2010 13:02
To: openocd-development@lists.berlios.de
Subject: [Openocd-development] GPL violations
Użytkownik Nico Coesel ncoe...@dealogic.nl napisał:
Freddie,
IMHO its in everyone's best interest if you describe what and where the
GPL violations are. People can then decide whether your findings are GPL
violations and what to do about them. Hear no evil - see no evil is not
going to work.
All
So let us know where do you find GPL violation ?
A T T E N T I O N : the GPL violation is not only for any distribution
of openocd with FTD2XX driver, but for any openocd binary with no
solution to rebuild openocd from scratch ... exemple : a product
embedding openocd in an external
Hi [;
You do remember the ftd2xx case? I clearly remember some of OpenOCD
leaders stating that any violation of GPL (distributing OpenOCD linked
to ftd2xx) will be legally fought, courts and various organizations
would be informed, etc.. Yet today I've found a fourth case of violating
this
On 2010-02-14 18:28, Freddie Chopin wrote:
... the third is ancient (r200-something) ...
Sorry - multiply that by 7.5 (r1500-something). There are other versions
in the same place too.
4\/3!!
___
Openocd-development mailing list