Re: CeCILL license : Free Software License for french research
On 2004-07-11 15:54:05 +0100 Francesco Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it>
wrote:
This looks like a weak definition of source code: what is *required*
so
as to modify a program written in C?
I agree, this looks like a lawyerbomb.
Moreover, I think it should say explicitly "the GNU General Public
License as published by the Free Software Foundation" and specify one
or
more versions.
Agreed. Maybe version specifier should be "latest available version on
the date of relicensing, or any later version"?
Do I understand this correctly?
The Holder guarantees he/she will go on distributing the Initial
Software until copyright expires: that's really a long time... :-?
I wonder that too. What happens if the holder violates this?
--
MJR/slef My Opinion Only and not of any group I know
http://www.ttllp.co.uk/ for creative copyleft computing
"Matthew Garrett is quite the good sort of fellow, despite what
my liver is sure to say about him in [...] 40 years" -- branden
Reply to: