I've now moved this thread to the wine-license list. I probably should have posted there in the first place - an oversight on my part. Sorry.
Anyway . . . > this license they can. > > Under GPL and BSD the developer has absoutely no control or means to keep > their work an open source because they > > cannot remove distribution from people who don't comply. > Sorry for the language but this is pure bullshit. The Free Software Foundation > has enforced the GPL many times, forcing proprietary vendors to GPL the code of > works deviated from GPL'ed code, and has always reached a settlement before > getting to court, that shows how good the GPL is. I have not heard nor read of such cases. At least there is nothing on their website. Can you provide links and/or references to them? I will also point out that the FSF wants to remove patent and Copyright laws that are currently in effect in the U.S. My goal is to provide Open Source software within the framework of those laws rather than try to have them changed. > IMHO you're quite confused, and don't have a good idea about what open source is > all about. You license closely remembers the shared source license. Could you please point out what part of a shared source license resembles the shared source license? Richard
