On Saturday 24 January 2004 07:11 pm, Bijan Soleymani wrote: > On Sat, Jan 24, 2004 at 06:28:17PM -0500, Al Davis wrote: > > You may copy and distribute this program freely, provided that: > > 1) No fee is charged for such copying and distribution, and > > 2) It is distributed ONLY in its original, unmodified state. > > > > How is this case different from GPL violations today? > > The GPL gives you the right to modify the program and distribute > modified versions. That means that you'd be allowed to modify the > program to make it run better. The major requirement of the GPL is > that you have to distribute the source along with the binaries. > > The GPL also allows a fee to be charged.
Good point. My point was that both are the same in that the issue was that a "free" program with source distributed is illegally forked and taken proprietary. It is an example of a case that GPL is designed to prevent. Remember .. this happened at a time when GPL was not well known. The more usual was a shareware license, like arc. Perhaps if it was originally released under GPL this would not have happened. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
