(Half off-topic--this is referring to a Windows program, but the
question is probably of interest to people here anyway.)
On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 12:23:38PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> Actually, that's not the case. CUPS *is* licensed under the GNU GPL, as
> far as anyone can tell. Easy Sof
Scripsit Glenn Maynard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 12:23:38PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > In short, *any* addition or subtraction to the license terms of the GPL
> > made by an author is an act of "dual-licensing". A copyright holder
> > can, of course, cease distributing
Scripsit Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Because of the GPL's inability to distinguish between "proprietary"
> > and "not GPL" (which has good legal-technical reasons) this means
> > that Debian's role w.r.t. the exception MUST be that of the
> > proprietary OS vendor, to the extent that Debi
On Fri, 2002-05-31 at 16:43, Henning Makholm wrote:
> Scripsit Jeff Licquia <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > > Because of the GPL's inability to distinguish between "proprietary"
> > > and "not GPL" (which has good legal-technical reasons) this means
> > > that Debian's role w.r.t. the exception MUST be
On Fri, 2002-05-31 at 15:34, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 12:23:38PM -0500, Branden Robinson wrote:
> > In short, *any* addition or subtraction to the license terms of the GPL
> > made by an author is an act of "dual-licensing". A copyright holder
> > can, of course, cease distri
5 matches
Mail list logo
