[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java |
Date: |
Thu, 02 Dec 2004 14:15:25 +0100 |
David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
> If multibillion companies are not eager to have their legal
> departments convulsed with laughter about this joke, ...
We'll see how much of the GPL will survive SCO vs IBM lawsuit. To me,
it seems to be a brilliant play on part of one "multibillion company"
to provoke "legal review" of FSF's stance. I mean IBM's almost-
literal-cut-and-paste-from-Moglen's-papers GPL violation filing
(contract vs "unilateral copyright permission" aside for a moment).
Go read SCO's latest court filing.
regards,
alexander.
- LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, Robert Dodier, 2004/12/01
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/12/01
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, robert_dodier, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, David Kastrup, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, David Kastrup, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java,
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, David Kastrup, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, David Kastrup, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, John Hasler, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, Alexander Terekhov, 2004/12/03
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, John Hasler, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, David Kastrup, 2004/12/02
- Re: LGPL reverse engineering clause & Java, John Hasler, 2004/12/02