[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Hyman Rosen
Subject: Re: Artifex v. Diebold: "The GPL is non-commercial!"
Date: Wed, 03 Dec 2008 20:05:39 -0500
User-agent: Thunderbird (Windows/20081105)

Alexander Terekhov wrote:
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?

Of course. In that case, you are correct and Artifex is wrong, as long
as Diebold is obeying the licensing terms.

reply via email to

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