From owner-freebsd-chat Tue Feb 18 16:06:55 1997 Return-Path: Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id QAA11774 for chat-outgoing; Tue, 18 Feb 1997 16:06:55 -0800 (PST) Received: from albert.gnu.ai.mit.edu (albert.gnu.ai.mit.edu [128.52.46.31]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA11759 for ; Tue, 18 Feb 1997 16:06:42 -0800 (PST) Received: from kropotkin.gnu.ai.mit.edu by albert.gnu.ai.mit.edu (8.6.12/8.6.12GNU) with ESMTP id TAA03691; Tue, 18 Feb 1997 19:08:25 -0500 Received: by kropotkin.gnu.ai.mit.edu (8.6.12/4.0) id ; Tue, 18 Feb 1997 19:06:15 -0500 Date: Tue, 18 Feb 1997 19:06:15 -0500 Message-Id: <199702190006.TAA09986@kropotkin.gnu.ai.mit.edu> To: nate@mt.sri.com CC: dg@root.com, ben@narcissus.ml.org, obrien@nuxi.com, chat@freebsd.org In-reply-to: <199702181845.LAA18064@rocky.mt.sri.com> (message from Nate Williams on Tue, 18 Feb 1997 11:45:34 -0700 (MST)) Subject: Re: GPL From: Joel Ray Holveck Reply-to: joelh@gnu.ai.mit.edu Sender: owner-chat@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk >> Suppose that 20 other people contributed patches to it during the time >> it was under GPL? ...you'd have to get written permission from all of those >> people before you could put a different copyright on it. >This is why the FSF requires that all submitters of code to their tools >sign over the Copyright to the FSF, which apparently will make sure the >code is always free. (Although last night I had a interesting >discussion on that point where it would be possible that the code could >become 'non-free') ENQ? Point: The FSF has accepted large amounts of code (ie, I believe all of the code from its major hackers) on the stipulation that it will be forever free. -- http://www.wp.com/piquan --- Joel Ray Holveck --- joelh@gnu.ai.mit.edu All my opinions are my own, not the FSF's, my employer's, or my dog's. Second law of programming: Anything that can go wrong wi sendmail: segmentation violation -- core dumped