Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2000 01:03:43 -0600 From: Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org> To: "Thomas M. Sommers" <tms2@mail.ptd.net> Cc: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: The GPL is really the PPL (Was: Sun's web site) Message-ID: <4.3.2.7.2.20000825010057.04c7fd90@localhost> In-Reply-To: <39A60207.4F8C6829@mail.ptd.net> References: <20000816221119.B7276@physics.iisc.ernet.in> <4.3.2.7.2.20000817232139.04cf0840@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000818064620.00dbc670@localhost> <4.3.2.7.2.20000819181556.04cf48c0@localhost>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 11:20 PM 8/24/2000, Thomas M. Sommers wrote: >My point was that if another company uses the source to make a profit, >that is good evidence that the original company could have made a >profit, too, and that management erred. On the other hand, if no other >company can make a profit, it will be harder to prove an error of >judgment by management. In other words, the PHBs made an error either way.... It's just a question of whether or not it becomes embarrasingly obvious. ;-) >I was talking about stockholder derivative suits. Anyway, a company >could be liable for the actions you mentioned even if it put its source >in the public domain, or used a BSD license. That problem has nothing >to do with the GPL. True. But if they GPL it, it's even worse. The code becomes a weapon against them and all other developers. --Brett To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4.3.2.7.2.20000825010057.04c7fd90>