Re: Dangerous precedent being set - possible serious violation of the GPL
Seth David Schoen wrote:
> Henning Makholm writes:
> > Caspian <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > > I'd just like to state that if anyone out there is interested in making a
> > > completely, utterly free software GNU/Linux dist, with a license that
> > > prohibits putzen like those at Corel from pulling the sort of nonsense
> > > they've been pulling,
> > Note that you won't be able to include any GPLed software in your
> > distribution if you want to make restrictions about how and when
> > other people or corporations are allowed to redistribute it.
> Where does the GPL say that? I can give you several examples of distributors
> who have made this their regular practice.
If you don't own the code that is GPLed, you can't relicense it
under a different license. How could you then use `a license
that prohibits putzen like those at Corel from pulling the sort
of nonsense they've been pulling' if the GPL allows it?