On 29 Jan 1999, John Hasler wrote: > Jules Bean writes: > > It doesn't limit 'use of the program in a commercial environment'. It > > limits 'commercial use of the code, by modifying it and selling the > > resultant binaries without providing source'. > > "It depends on what the definition of 'use' is." > > Ask twelve ordinary people (the members of the jury at the trial of a > copyright lawsuit, for example) what "commercial use of software" means and > they will all say something like "using it to print invoices for a > business". Suggest your definition and they will be baffled.
Of course. I would answer the same. Except actually in the context of that bizarre license agreement - and in that context, the interpretation I suggested is the one which made most sense to me. In any case, the correct answer here is definitely to contact the author for clarification.. Jules /----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------\ | Jelibean aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 6 Evelyn Rd | | Jules aka | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Richmond, Surrey | | Julian Bean | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TW9 2TF *UK* | +----------------+-------------------------------+---------------------+ | War doesn't demonstrate who's right... just who's left. | | When privacy is outlawed... only the outlaws have privacy. | \----------------------------------------------------------------------/
