Re: Aspell-en license Once again.
Walter Landry <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Brian Nelson <email@example.com> wrote:
>> Why did you snip the rest of my explanation? As I said, that statement
>> is *not* a license. The DEC word list has no license.
> The DEC word list has a license, which we do not know all of the
> specifics about. However, one of the things that we do know about the
> license is that it is only for non-commercial use.
We don't know that. That's only what the person who compiled the lists
hypothesizes, whose "copyright" holders are not known. AFAIK, a license
can only be granted by the copyright holder. So what exactly makes that
statement a license of any sort?
People said I was dumb, but I proved them!