Branden Robinson wrote:
...
My kudos to you for all of the above. It's refreshing to see a company
that has a solid grasp of free licensing, applies it to their products,
and puts things in plain language on their website instead of leaving
things ambiguous and using weasel words per their lawye
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 03:20:37PM -0400, Michael Sweet wrote:
> OK, for the purposes of clarification, how does the following
> additional sentence sound:
>
> No developer is required to provide these exceptions in a
> derived work.
Sounds great. It sounds like we're utterly on the same
On Wed, 2002-05-15 at 14:20, Michael Sweet wrote:
> OK, for the purposes of clarification, how does the following
> additional sentence sound:
>
> No developer is required to provide these exceptions in a
> derived work.
>
> I've put the ammended license agreement up on the CUPS server
Branden Robinson wrote:
...
The bottom line is that a work is either licensed under the GNU GPL or
it is not. By all accounts, CUPS is licensed under the GNU GPL. It
just so happens that it is also licensed under other terms, presumably
to parties to whom the GNU GPL is unpalatable. Custom-tai
4 matches
Mail list logo
