gnu-misc-discuss
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

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

Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!"


From: Alexander Terekhov
Subject: Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!"
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 19:39:42 +0100

Hyman Rosen wrote:
> 
> Alexander Terekhov wrote:
> > "nothing other than this License grants you permission to
>  > propagate or modify any covered work"
> 
> When you receive code under a separate license, it doesn't
> matter what the GPL says.

I agree with that. But think about the case of Diebold receiving the
ghostscript code under the GPL and now facing Artifex's claim that the
GPL is non-commercial... in effect, meaning that Diebold should have
applied for Artifex's proprietary license irrespective of the GPL's
postulate that "nothing else grants you permission" (in GPLv3 speak:
"nothing other than this License grants you permission to propagate or
modify any covered work"). Got it now, Hyman?

regards,
alexander.

-- 
http://gng.z505.com/index.htm 
(GNG is a derecursive recursive derecursion which pwns GNU since it can 
be infinitely looped as GNGNGNGNG...NGNGNG... and can be said backwards 
too, whereas GNU cannot.)


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]