[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: help with crafting proper license header for a dual-licensing project



On Mon, 28 May 2007 22:29:27 +0100 Anthony W. Youngman wrote:

> In message <20070528230153.248d87a8.frx@firenze.linux.it>, Francesco 
> Poli <frx@firenze.linux.it> writes
> >I still cannot see why "proprietary" should mean "with secret source
> >code": its basic common meaning is "owned by a proprietor" and does
> >not refer to closeness or secrecy.
> 
> Your own words condemn you :-)
> 
> This is an accurate description of linux. Linux is "owned by a 
> proprietor", namely whoever (singular or plural) happens to own the 
> copyright(s).

I've already explained in which sense a piece of free software can be
considered to be not really "owned" by anyone, so I won't repeat the
argument here.

And anyway, the Linux kernel indeed (and unfortunately) has some
non-free parts...

-- 
 http://frx.netsons.org/doc/nanodocs/testing_workstation_install.html
 Need to read a Debian testing installation walk-through?
..................................................... Francesco Poli .
 GnuPG key fpr == C979 F34B 27CE 5CD8 DC12  31B5 78F4 279B DD6D FCF4

Attachment: pgpfYrZTQsxVP.pgp
Description: PGP signature


Reply to: