On 12-Apr-07, at 7:21 PM, Rich Teer wrote:
On Thu, 12 Apr 2007, Toby Thain wrote:
Individually, Linux contributors have every right to retain their
choice
of license for software they produce. But given the viral nature
of the
GPL,
Is it worth reading the rest of your post, if it starts with
silliness like
that?
Do you mean to imply that the GPL is NOT viral in nature?
It's a neat piece of slander, but inconveniently, nobody has made it
stick.
Those who promulgate the tag for whatever motive - often agencies of
Microsoft - have all foundered on the simple fact that the GPL
applies ONLY to MY code as licensor (*and modifications thereto*); it
has absolutely nothing to say about what you do with YOUR code.
The GPL, which as you know is built on copyright, is a purely
voluntary license - revealing the analogy to be worthless and the
claim pure FUD. Viruses - whether biological or Windows-borne - are
not something you generally get to refuse.
--Toby
--
Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member
CEO,
My Online Home Inventory
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
http://www.myonlinehomeinventory.com
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
