From 0ea5fc66924303d1bf73ba283a383e2aadee02f2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: neodarz Date: Sat, 11 Aug 2018 20:21:34 +0200 Subject: Initial commit --- pipermail/nel/2001-December/000815.html | 73 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 73 insertions(+) create mode 100644 pipermail/nel/2001-December/000815.html (limited to 'pipermail/nel/2001-December/000815.html') diff --git a/pipermail/nel/2001-December/000815.html b/pipermail/nel/2001-December/000815.html new file mode 100644 index 00000000..51ebfc91 --- /dev/null +++ b/pipermail/nel/2001-December/000815.html @@ -0,0 +1,73 @@ + + + + [Nel] RE: GPL confusion + + + + + + +

[Nel] RE: GPL confusion

+ Jon Watte + hplus@mindcontrol.org
+ Fri, 14 Dec 2001 10:19:49 -0800 +

+
+ +
> Therefore, the current development code is in the public 
+> domain, therefore should be published.
+
+I find two things confusing about this sentence.
+
+1) Something that is under GPL is explicitly NOT in the public 
+domain, as something under the GPL suffers substantially more 
+restrictive licensing than something that is in the public 
+domain. Basically, if it's in the PD, you can do what you want 
+to it, except POSSIBLY not mis-represent the origin. The GPL 
+imposes many more strictures on your use of the code.
+
+2) The GPL only requires that source code is made available 
+free of charge to anyone who purchases binaries, and that no 
+restrictions are made on the purchaser's rights to use that 
+source code (including subsequent redistribution). If Ryzom is 
+not for sale to anyone, then there is no requirement for the 
+developers thereof to make any source code available.
+
+Now, the GPL may have changed slightly since I last read it 
+through in full, but your statement does not seem to be based 
+on the actual language of the GPL.
+
+
+
+
+ + + + + + + +
+

+ -- cgit v1.2.1