Birzan George Cristian wrote:
One: nmap's license is GPL. the "mention" you talked about is just a warning to SCO that, having violated the GPL, their license is terminated, in accordanceNow, my questions for you are: 1) Is nmap's licence GPL, or by adding that mention, they created a new licence?
2) Is nmap DFSG compliant, and can be distributed in Debian?
Two: see One above.
3) Was I on crack when reading the above?
Three: it seems so. :-)In Fyodor's opinion, SCO violated some (yet unknown?) terms of the GPL license in his works (nmap). He is telling them their license is therefore void. As to especulate where SCO violated Fyodor's rights, it's possible that the language at the second half of section 5 explains it: "Therefore, by modifying or distributing the Program (or any work based on the Program), you indicate your acceptance of this License to do so, and all its terms and conditions for copying, distributing or modifying the Program or works based on it." But, as SCO stated in *official court documents*, they do not accept the GPL as a valid license; therefore, they cannot distribute nmap.