Re: (Fwd) Re: [firstname.lastname@example.org: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiw
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: (Fwd) Re: [firstname.lastname@example.org: Re: Isn't a kde version of abiw
- From: "Ivan E. Moore II" <email@example.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 May 1999 05:56:59 -0700
- Message-id: <19990528055659.A5256@tdyc.com>
- In-reply-to: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; from Navindra Umanee on Fri, May 28, 1999 at 08:53:42AM -0400
- References: <199905280234.MAA23788@kestrel.ke.com.au> <email@example.com> <19990527232545.C2328@debian.org> <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On Fri, May 28, 1999 at 08:53:42AM -0400, Navindra Umanee wrote:
> Btw, neither Caldera, RedHat, SuSE, Corel, Mandrake, Slackware,...
> seem to think there's much of a problem. Any idea why that would be?
> Are their lawyers any different from Debian lawyers?
RedHat did at one point in time pull it...or planned on it. They even
had a page up on their site about the issues with the qt license. They
may have just come to the conclusion that no one will go after them (which
is probably 100% true). Debian just lives by the CYA policy. :)
I don't know about the others. They probably follow the same thoughts
as everyone else.
Ivan E. Moore II Rev. Krusty
GPG Fingerprint=3291 F65F 01C9 A4EC DD46 C6AB FBBC D7FF 0E1A 75E3