Re: Combining GPL and commercial license

[David Kastrup]

Alexander Terekhov <terekhov@web.de> writes:

> David Kastrup wrote:
> [...]
>> Yes, and he quite clearly stated that their product as a whole was
>> supposed to have a GPLed component, ergo be a combined work derived
>> from (among others) the GPLed piece.
>
> His product as whole is NOT a derivative work, idiot.
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20040207022922296
>
> SCO:
>
> 30. The various identified versions of UNIX are sometimes referred 
> to as UNIX “flavors.” All commercial UNIX “flavors” in use today are 
> modifications of, and derivative works based on, the UNIX System V 
> Technology (“System V Technology”).
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2004040118450269
>
> IBM:
>
> 30. Denies the averments of paragrpah 30 as they relate to IBM and 
> Sequent or to AIX and Dynix/ptx, except states that IBM develps, 
> manufactures and markets a product under the name "Dynix/ptx".

Cute.  Another completely irrelevant quote.  Court filings (not even a
judgment) for a completely different setting.

You are really striking wild lately.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum