[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GPL and inhouse use?
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: GPL and inhouse use? |
Date: |
Thu, 18 May 2006 00:59:59 +0200 |
Richard Tobin wrote:
[...]
> For example, suppose you provide a service to the public that compiles
> programs using a modified version of gcc, but you don't give out
> copies of the modified compiler: you just accept .c files and return
> .o files. As far as I can see, the current GPL does not apply to this
> situation at all.
Affero GPL also doesn't apply to this situation at all.
regards,
alexander.
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, (continued)
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Merijn de Weerd, 2006/05/14
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/05/15
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Eric, 2006/05/15
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, John Hasler, 2006/05/15
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Merijn de Weerd, 2006/05/16
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, David Kastrup, 2006/05/16
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Merijn de Weerd, 2006/05/16
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/05/16
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, David Kastrup, 2006/05/16
- Message not available
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Richard Tobin, 2006/05/17
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?,
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/05/16
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, David Kastrup, 2006/05/16
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Merijn de Weerd, 2006/05/16
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Alexander Terekhov, 2006/05/16
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, John Hasler, 2006/05/16
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/05/17
- Message not available
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, David Kastrup, 2006/05/17
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/05/17
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, David Kastrup, 2006/05/17
- Re: GPL and inhouse use?, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2006/05/17