Thanks Todd,
I just wanted to make sure we didn't loose pine over a license
misunderstanding. Keep up the great work!
Todd Lyons wrote:
> David Rankin wrote on Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 01:35:00PM -0500 :
> > Not true!, see beloe
> > > Pine has a commercial license. We are not allowed to distribute a
> > > modified version.
> > Mark Crispin wrote:
> > > The issue with the "restrictive" license agreement boils down to one major
> > > issue: if someone wishes to distribute a modified version of Pine, they
> > > have to ask UW for permission first.
> > > Put another way, UW claims control over what is distributed with the name
> > > "Pine". It's alright to distribute unmodified Pine; it's alright to
> > > distribute patches to modify Pine. But if you want to distribute a
> > > modified Pine, you have to ask first.
>
> I chose my words incorrectly. The first sentence is wrong in your
> eyes and right in my eyes. The second sentence is only partially
> correct because we are able to distribute the modified version, but only
> if we ask. The next quoted section has a better stated position.
>
> Let me be more exact. Pine's license is not Free. If it was Free, they
> would not be able to put those restrictions on it.
>
> > > > > 3. I could not locate the pine package anywhere on the disks.
> > > > It's been removed because the University of Washington, its owners,
> > > > introduced a homebrewed licence which is more restrictive than GPL or
> > > > similar.
>
> This one is exactly correct (and what I should have said the first
> time).
>
> Blue skies... Todd
> --
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Part 1.2Type: application/pgp-signature
--
David C. Rankin, J.D., P.E.
RANKIN * BERTIN, PLLC
510 Ochiltree Street
Nacogdoches, Texas 75961
(936) 715-9333
(936) 715-9339 fax
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft?
Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
