[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: GNU License, Again
From: |
John Hasler |
Subject: |
Re: GNU License, Again |
Date: |
Mon, 21 May 2007 07:58:59 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.99 (gnu/linux) |
BAJ
> It's yours in your example. You can do whatever you like.
This is true if both programs are his (I read his article the other way).
The GPL is model license, not a law. Only the copyright owner can sue for
copyright infringement, and you are not going to sue yourself.
To the OP: yes, you can do all the stuff you described. On the other hand,
you could just distribute the combination of your closed source work and
your GPL work under any terms you see fit and be happy. All the gyrations
are superfluous if you own all the copyrights in the GPL program and
useless if you don't.
--
John Hasler
john@dhh.gt.org
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, WI USA
- GNU License, Again, mike3, 2007/05/21
- Re: GNU License, Again, none, 2007/05/21
- Re: GNU License, Again,
John Hasler <=
- Re: GNU License, Again, Richard Tobin, 2007/05/21
- Re: GNU License, Again, John Hasler, 2007/05/21
- Re: GNU License, Again, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2007/05/21
- Re: GNU License, Again, mike3, 2007/05/21
- Re: GNU License, Again, John Hasler, 2007/05/21
- Re: GNU License, Again, David Kastrup, 2007/05/21
- Re: GNU License, Again, mike3, 2007/05/22
- Re: GNU License, Again, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2007/05/22
- Re: GNU License, Again, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2007/05/22
- Re: GNU License, Again, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2007/05/22