[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled |
Date: |
Mon, 22 Feb 2010 19:04:33 +0000 (UTC) |
User-agent: |
tin/1.6.2-20030910 ("Pabbay") (UNIX) (FreeBSD/4.11-RELEASE (i386)) |
Hyman Rosen <hyrosen@mail.com> wrote:
> On 2/22/2010 1:42 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
>> What matters is that the terms and conditions in the GPL are legally
>> valid, and have now been tested in an appeals court in the United States
>> of America.
> That was the Artistic License, not the GPL, but good enough.
Ah, thanks! I thought there was something a little wrong. Still, if the
artistic license holds up, the GPL'll be a doddle.
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, (continued)
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Alexander Terekhov, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Alan Mackenzie, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled,
Alan Mackenzie <=
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, David Kastrup, 2010/02/23
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Alan Mackenzie, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, RJack, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Hyman Rosen, 2010/02/22
- Re: Jacobsen v. Katzer settled, Alan Mackenzie, 2010/02/22