From: Dermot Daly (dermot.daly at domain itsmobile.com)
Date: Thu 26 Sep 2002 - 10:01:03 IST
Just another couple of points. I'm guessing here, but I think what I am
saying is true:
1. Netscape where the original owners of the Netscape Code (obviously!)
(which became Ghecko in the open source arena).
2. AOL own Netscape
3. When you issue something under GPL (or other such licenses) you don't
give up Copyright, and you can still give other licenses to other
4. So....for example if AOL are working off the original Netscape Code
which was released to the Open Source community, they could still have
sold it as a separate "do what you want with this code" license to AOL.
Just by 2 cent.
From: Rick Moen [mailto:rick at domain linuxmafia.com]
Sent: 26 September 2002 00:19
To: ilug at domain linux.ie
Cc: kevin+dated+1033426526.396739 at domain ie.suberic.net
Subject: Re: [ILUG] open source
Quoting kevin lyda (kevin+dated+1033426526.396739 at domain ie.suberic.net):
>> The GPL does allow for this, and the FSF actively encourage it.
> except that you must release the source of the resulting application.
Specifically, make available via one of three methods the matching
source -- but the obligation exists only towards those who have lawfully
received covered binaries.
Nothing automatically compels release of source, at least not
unconditionally: An obligation of source access is triggered only upon
distribution to outsiders.
-- Irish Linux Users' Group: ilug at domain linux.ie http://www.linux.ie/mailman/listinfo/ilug for (un)subscription information. List maintainer: listmaster at domain linux.ie
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Thu 06 Feb 2003 - 13:19:05 GMT