On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 11:54:22AM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 03, 2001 at 04:38:21PM +1000, Anthony Towns wrote:
> > Alice wrote foo.c, licensed under the GNU X11 license.
> I've never seen a GNU X11 license, nor is one listed at
> http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/license-list.html.
There's what they claim is the MIT X11 license, which doesn't match the
X11 license on xfree86.org's website. I choose to call that the GNU X11
license to make it clear what I'm talking about.
> > Bob did last time and misrepresenting her ability to sublicense
> > works based on foo.c and infringing on Alice's copyright, or
> > she's not abiding by the terms of the GPL (ie, not licensing the
> > work as a whole in the proper way), and thus infringing on Bob's
> > copyright.
> This sentence doesn't make grammatical sense.
Of course it doesn't: you cut out the beginning of the sentence: "If not,
she's either doing the same thing as"
Cheers,
aj
--
Anthony Towns <aj@humbug.org.au> <http://azure.humbug.org.au/~aj/>
I don't speak for anyone save myself. GPG signed mail preferred.
``_Any_ increase in interface difficulty, in exchange for a benefit you
do not understand, cannot perceive, or don't care about, is too much.''
-- John S. Novak, III (The Humblest Man on the Net)
Attachment:
pgp8pivst5RhW.pgp
Description: PGP signature