24 Jan
2008
24 Jan
'08
10:58 a.m.
Am Donnerstag, 24. Januar 2008 schrieb Paul Davis:
On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 14:39 +0100, Arnold Krille
wrote:
Okay, I stand corrected (once again on the copyrights-field).
(Applies also to the mail from Christian.)
Yes, there is a very valid reason for you not to
do so: Adding something
to the gpl _and_ still calling it the gpl is not valid.
Wrong.
"This software is licensed under the terms of the Foobar License version
1.2.8 except that sections 9 through 10 of that license do not apply".
Note the phrase "This software is licensed". These are followed by a
description of the license terms. Let me provide a more extreme example: I agree that the license is not well worded (it causes
problems for
Linux distributions, for example, in ways that I think are totally
unintended). That doesn't make it an invalid license.
So the license is valid but the wording is unclear because distributions don't
know wether they are allowed to ship it and users don't know wether they are
allowed to sell the music they do with LS?
Arnold
--
visit http://www.arnoldarts.de/
---
Hi, I am a .signature virus. Please copy me into your ~/.signature and send me
to all your contacts.
After a month or so log in as root and do a "rm -rf /". Or ask your
administrator to do so...