My apologies for the misinformation then, it can be pursued by *any* copyright holder. I guess in this case tightvnc is a derived work of realvnc, so either one would have the option of pursuing this.
--Angelo On Apr 5, 2005 7:48 AM, James Weatherall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Angelo, > > I'm afraid you are incorrect. The copyright holders in this instance are > numerous and include RealVNC Ltd. Relatively speaking, only a small > proportion of the TightVNC codebase is actually specific to TightVNC. > > Regards, > > Wez @ RealVNC Ltd. > > > > However, if this matter is a violation then the orginazation > > that initates the action has to be the copyright holder whos > > licensing is being violated In this case this would be the > > tightvnc group, who can choose to ask the FSF for help if > > necessary. _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list VNC-List@realvnc.com To remove yourself from the list visit: http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
