29 Jan
2011
29 Jan
'11
7:15 p.m.
On Saturday 29 January 2011 05:40:52 Geoff Beasley wrote:
On 01/29/2011 12:51 PM, Tim E. Real wrote:
Removing names from copyright notices _will_ get you in court regardless
whether its free software or not. Its a breach of the license, nothing less.
And breaching the license revokes your right to do anything with the software,
you would not be allowed to sell it, change it, compile it, use it, look at
it, nor have it on your hard-drive.
I am not a lawyer (thankfully), only a software-programmer and future
business-boss but removing names from copyright-notices at anytime in the
repository (and adding them back in) is basically a no-go and will open you up
for a big shoot out. And you will loose...
Oh, changing the license without the permission from all copyright-holders is
the same kind of crime and results in the same penalties. Regardless whether
you switch from "gpl2 or any later" to "gpl3 only" or from "gpl2
or later" to
"gpl3 or later" or even from "gpl2 or later" to "gpl2"...
Have fun,
Arnold
As a courtesy, we'll also add a reference to
muse in
> the already maintained copyright section in each file.
Alex, you still
don't seem to get the point - none of these requests are
a generous or "courteous" addition on your part - it's a licence
requirement. The VAST majority of what you have supplied here as your
"product" simply isn't.