On Fri, 2004-08-06 at 22:06 +0000, Carlos Morgado wrote: > So Rui is sort-of-right, he's just picking on the wrong point or believing > it's blidingly obvious the "or" between Works and Program makes it possible > for a non free version for Evo to be released as long as the original patch > remains unchanged. It's not an or that's the problem. It's: A. B. Two sentences. Neither of them acceptable on a GPL project. A ~= We'll make it available under a DFSG (or whatever the current wording is) license B ~= Besides that, we'll be able to, at our sole discretion, license it in another kind of license. B is totally legal, after all, they _are_ the new copyright holders. However, you're giving them copyrights without anything in return, like the reason why the GPL exists: to keep software Free. The collection of all the rights without any promise to maintain the terms of the GPL is for all pratical effects a circunvention of the GPL. Such a copyright assignment contract shouldn't be admissible in any gnome module (much less so blindly defended by any GF board member). Rui -- + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? Please AVOID sending me WORD, EXCEL or POWERPOINT attachments. See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part