Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2001 16:15:59 -0800 From: Dave Walton <dwalton@acm.org> To: Mike Meyer <mwm-dated-1009583789.5d0de0@mired.org> Cc: chat@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Does Linux violate the GPL? Message-ID: <20011223161559.0f20faa8.dwalton@acm.org> In-Reply-To: <15398.28461.605242.845831@guru.mired.org> References: <20011223153232.4b562a74.dwalton@acm.org> <15398.28461.605242.845831@guru.mired.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 23 Dec 2001 17:56:29 -0600, "Mike Meyer" <mwm-dated-1009583789.5d0de0@mired.org> wrote: > You're making the same mistake that Gary kept trying to straighten > out. Neither BSDL nor GPL place any restrictions on *use* of the > covered work. The restrictions are on distribution. So all the places > where you say "may not legally use", you really need to say "may not > legally distribute". I.e. - if I take T and add S - neither of which I > hold a copyright to - I can legally use it without violating either > license, but I can't let anyone else have a copy. Rats. I knew there was going to be a mistake in my wording somewhere. When I wrote "use", I was thinking of something along the lines of "incorporate and distribute". So if I substitute "may not legally distribute" for all instances of "may not legally use", does that remove all your objections to my statements? Thanks, Dave -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Dave Walton dwalton@acm.org ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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?20011223161559.0f20faa8.dwalton>