Re: APSL 2.0
Brian Kimball <bk@bk.cx> wrote:
> That was my first post on this topic. You've got me confused with
> someone else. [...]
Quite likely. Apologies. Hence the vague terms.
> Oh, and I was joking.
It is remarkable that your jokes are not dissimilar from the posts of
someone else ;-)
[...]
> Because it's all about the content, not the program delivering the
> content. [...]
And so we fold into another thread about licensing of other electronic
works. Should we have similar disclosure in all electronic works?
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and possibly not of any group I know.
http://mjr.towers.org.uk/ jabber://slef@jabber.at
Reply to: