[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
www/philosophy selling-exceptions.de.html selli...
|
From: |
GNUN |
|
Subject: |
www/philosophy selling-exceptions.de.html selli... |
|
Date: |
Sun, 9 Apr 2017 10:59:49 -0400 (EDT) |
CVSROOT: /web/www
Module name: www
Changes by: GNUN <gnun> 17/04/09 10:59:49
Modified files:
philosophy : selling-exceptions.de.html
selling-exceptions.pl.html
philosophy/po : selling-exceptions.pl-diff.html
Added files:
philosophy/po : selling-exceptions.de-diff.html
Log message:
Automatic update by GNUnited Nations.
CVSWeb URLs:
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/selling-exceptions.de.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.47&r2=1.48
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/selling-exceptions.pl.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.29&r2=1.30
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.pl-diff.html?cvsroot=www&r1=1.1&r2=1.2
http://web.cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewcvs/www/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.de-diff.html?cvsroot=www&rev=1.1
Patches:
Index: selling-exceptions.de.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/selling-exceptions.de.html,v
retrieving revision 1.47
retrieving revision 1.48
diff -u -b -r1.47 -r1.48
--- selling-exceptions.de.html 3 Dec 2016 23:45:11 -0000 1.47
+++ selling-exceptions.de.html 9 Apr 2017 14:59:48 -0000 1.48
@@ -1,4 +1,9 @@
-<!--#set var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/selling-exceptions.en.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.de.po">
+ https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.de.po</a>'
+ --><!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/selling-exceptions.html"
+ --><!--#set var="DIFF_FILE"
value="/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.de-diff.html"
+ --><!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2017-02-08" --><!--#set
var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/selling-exceptions.en.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.de.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.79 -->
@@ -9,6 +14,7 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.de.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.de.html" -->
<h2>Ausnahmen zur GNU GPL verkaufen</h2>
<p>von <a href="http://www.stallman.org/";><strong>Richard
Stallman</strong></a></p>
@@ -201,7 +207,7 @@
<p class="unprintable"><!-- timestamp start -->
Letzte Ãnderung:
-$Date: 2016/12/03 23:45:11 $
+$Date: 2017/04/09 14:59:48 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: selling-exceptions.pl.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/selling-exceptions.pl.html,v
retrieving revision 1.29
retrieving revision 1.30
diff -u -b -r1.29 -r1.30
--- selling-exceptions.pl.html 18 Nov 2016 07:32:47 -0000 1.29
+++ selling-exceptions.pl.html 9 Apr 2017 14:59:49 -0000 1.30
@@ -1,4 +1,9 @@
-<!--#set var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/selling-exceptions.en.html" -->
+<!--#set var="PO_FILE"
+ value='<a href="/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.pl.po">
+ https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.pl.po</a>'
+ --><!--#set var="ORIGINAL_FILE" value="/philosophy/selling-exceptions.html"
+ --><!--#set var="DIFF_FILE"
value="/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.pl-diff.html"
+ --><!--#set var="OUTDATED_SINCE" value="2017-02-08" --><!--#set
var="ENGLISH_PAGE" value="/philosophy/selling-exceptions.en.html" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.pl.html" -->
<!-- Parent-Version: 1.79 -->
@@ -9,6 +14,7 @@
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.pl.html" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/outdated.pl.html" -->
<h2>Sprzedaż wyjÄ
tków do GNU GPL</h2>
<p><a href="http://www.stallman.org/";>Richard Stallman</a></p>
@@ -210,7 +216,7 @@
<p class="unprintable"><!-- timestamp start -->
Aktualizowane:
-$Date: 2016/11/18 07:32:47 $
+$Date: 2017/04/09 14:59:49 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
Index: po/selling-exceptions.pl-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /web/www/www/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.pl-diff.html,v
retrieving revision 1.1
retrieving revision 1.2
diff -u -b -r1.1 -r1.2
--- po/selling-exceptions.pl-diff.html 29 Feb 2016 22:58:30 -0000 1.1
+++ po/selling-exceptions.pl-diff.html 9 Apr 2017 14:59:49 -0000 1.2
@@ -11,47 +11,24 @@
</style></head>
<body><pre>
<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
-<!-- Parent-Version: 1.77 -->
-<title>Selling Exceptions <span class="inserted"><ins><em>to the GNU
GPL</em></ins></span>
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.79 -->
+<title>Selling Exceptions to the GNU GPL
- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
<link rel="canonical"
href="http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/selling-exceptions"; />
<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.translist" -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
-<h2>Selling <span
class="removed"><del><strong>Exceptions</h2></strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Exceptions to the GNU GPL</h2></em></ins></span>
+<h2>Selling Exceptions to the GNU GPL</h2>
<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/">Richard
Stallman</a></p>
-<p><em>The practice of selling license exceptions became a hot
topic
-when I co-signed Knowledge Ecology International's letter warning that
-Oracle's purchase of MySQL (plus the rest of Sun) might not be good
-for MySQL.</em></p>
-
-<p><em>As the following article explains, my feelings about selling
-license exceptions are mixed. Clearly it is possible to develop
-powerful and complex software packages under the GNU GPL without
-selling exceptions, and we do this. MySQL can be developed this way
-too. However, selling exceptions has been used by MySQL developers.
-Who should decide whether to continue this? I don't think it is wise
-to give major decisions about a free software project to a large
-proprietary competitor, which might naturally prefer that the project
-develop less rather than more.</em></p>
-
-<p><em>One thing that makes no sense at all is the idea of changing
-the license of MySQL to something non-copyleft. That would eliminate
-the possibility of selling exceptions, but allow all sorts of
-proprietary modified versions. Wherever MySQL should go, it isn't
-there.</em></p>
-
-<h3>On Selling Exceptions to the GNU GPL</h3>
-
-<p>When I co-signed
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>When I co-signed
the <a href="/philosophy/ec_letter_mysql_oct19.pdf">letter objecting
to Oracle's planned purchase of
MySQL</a><sup><a href="#footnote">1</a></sup>
(along with the rest of
Sun), some free software supporters were surprised that I approved of
the practice of selling license exceptions which the MySQL developers
have used. They expected me to condemn the practice outright. This
-article explains what I think of the practice, and why.</p>
+article explains what I think of the practice, and
why.</p></strong></del></span>
<p>Selling exceptions means that the copyright holder of the code
releases it to the public under a free software license, then lets
@@ -66,10 +43,34 @@
exceptions, the same code that the exception applies to is available
to the general public as free software. An extension or a modified
version that is only available under a proprietary license is
-proprietary software, pure and simple, and no better than any other
+proprietary software, pure and simple, and <span
class="removed"><del><strong>no better than</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>just as wrong as</em></ins></span> any other
proprietary software. This article is concerned with cases that
involve strictly and only the sale of exceptions.</p>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>We must also distinguish selling
exceptions from dual licensing,
+which means releasing the program under a choice of licenses. With
+dual licensing, each user can choose to use the program under either
+one of the licenses, or under both in parallel for activities that fit
+both. (Thus, redistributors normally pass along both of the
+licenses.) For instance, Perl was distributed for many years under a
+dual license whose alternatives were the GNU GPL and the Artistic
+License. That is not necessary any more because version 2 of the
+Artistic License is compatible with the GNU GPL.</p>
+
+<p>In selling exceptions, the exception's terms are not a second
+license that the program is released under. Rather, they are
+available only to those users that buy an exception. The only license
+that the release carries is the GNU GPL, so this is not dual
+licensing.</p>
+
+<p>We must distinguish selling of exceptions from the usual kind of
+“exception to the GPL,” which simply gives all users
+permission to go beyond the GPL's conditions in some specific way.
+These exceptions are governed by section 7 of the GNU GPL. Selling
+exceptions is legally independent of the GNU GPL. To avoid confusion
+it is best not to refer to exceptions that are sold as
+“exceptions to the GPL.”</p></em></ins></span>
+
<p>I've considered selling exceptions acceptable since the 1990s, and on
occasion I've suggested it to companies. Sometimes this approach has
made it possible for important programs to become free software.</p>
@@ -109,13 +110,15 @@
that the developer that sold the exception is doing something wrong
too?</p>
-<p>If that implication is valid, it would also apply to releasing the
+<p>If that implication <span
class="removed"><del><strong>is</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>were</em></ins></span> valid, it would also apply to
releasing the
same program under a noncopyleft free software license, such as the
X11 license. That also permits such embedding. So either we have to
conclude that it's wrong to release anything under the X11
license—a conclusion I find unacceptably extreme—or reject
-this implication. Using a noncopyleft license is weak, and usually an
-inferior choice, but it's not wrong.</p>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong>this</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em>the</em></ins></span> implication. Using a
noncopyleft license is weak,
+and <span class="removed"><del><strong>usually</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em><a
href="/licenses/license-recommendations.html">usually</em></ins></span> an
+inferior <span class="removed"><del><strong>choice,</strong></del></span>
<span class="inserted"><ins><em>choice</a>,</em></ins></span> but it's
not wrong.</p>
<p>In other words, selling exceptions permits limited embedding of the
code in proprietary software, but the X11 license goes even further,
@@ -130,7 +133,7 @@
under GPL version 3-or-later and not allow embedding in proprietary
software. Selling exceptions wouldn't achieve this, just as release
under the X11 license wouldn't. So normally we don't do either of
-those things. We release under the GPL only.</p>
+those <span class="removed"><del><strong>things. We</strong></del></span>
<span class="inserted"><ins><em>things: we</em></ins></span> release under the
GPL only.</p>
<p>Another reason we release only under the GPL is so as not to permit
proprietary extensions that would present practical advantages over
@@ -138,7 +141,9 @@
those non-free versions rather than the free programs they are based
on—and lose their freedom. We don't want to encourage that.</p>
-<p>But there are occasional cases where, for specific reasons of
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>But there</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>There</em></ins></span> are
occasional cases where, for specific reasons of
strategy, we decide that using a more permissive license on a certain
program is better for the cause of freedom. In those cases, we
release the program to everyone under that permissive license.</p>
@@ -155,11 +160,12 @@
and I will suggest it where appropriate as a way to get programs
freed.</p>
-<h4>Footnotes</h4>
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>Footnotes</h4>
<p id="footnote">This is a local copy of the document
from <a
href="http://keionline.org/sites/default/files/ec_letter_mysql_oct19.pdf">its
-original location</a>.</p>
+original location</a>.</p></strong></del></span>
+
</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
<div id="footer">
@@ -189,18 +195,17 @@
information on coordinating and submitting translations of this
article.</p>
</div>
-<p>Copyright © 2009, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2010</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2010, 2015, 2016</em></ins></span> Richard
Stallman</p>
+<p>Copyright © 2009, 2010, 2015, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2016</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2016, 2017</em></ins></span> Richard
Stallman</p>
<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
-<span
class="removed"><del><strong>href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/">Creative</strong></del></span>
-<span
class="inserted"><ins><em>href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative</em></ins></span>
-Commons <span class="removed"><del><strong>Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United
States</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0
International</em></ins></span> License</a>.</p>
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
License</a>.</p>
<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
<p class="unprintable">Updated:
<!-- timestamp start -->
-$Date: 2016/02/29 22:58:30 $
+$Date: 2017/04/09 14:59:49 $
<!-- timestamp end -->
</p>
</div>
Index: po/selling-exceptions.de-diff.html
===================================================================
RCS file: po/selling-exceptions.de-diff.html
diff -N po/selling-exceptions.de-diff.html
--- /dev/null 1 Jan 1970 00:00:00 -0000
+++ po/selling-exceptions.de-diff.html 9 Apr 2017 14:59:49 -0000 1.1
@@ -0,0 +1,215 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+ "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd";>
+<!-- Generated by GNUN -->
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"; xml:lang="en" lang="en">
+<head>
+<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8" />
+<title>/philosophy/selling-exceptions.html-diff</title>
+<style type="text/css">
+span.removed { background-color: #f22; color: #000; }
+span.inserted { background-color: #2f2; color: #000; }
+</style></head>
+<body><pre>
+<!--#include virtual="/server/header.html" -->
+<!-- Parent-Version: 1.79 -->
+<title>Selling Exceptions to the GNU GPL
+- GNU Project - Free Software Foundation</title>
+<link rel="canonical"
href="http://www.fsf.org/blogs/rms/selling-exceptions"; />
+<!--#include virtual="/philosophy/po/selling-exceptions.translist" -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/banner.html" -->
+<h2>Selling Exceptions to the GNU GPL</h2>
+
+<p>by <a href="http://www.stallman.org/">Richard
Stallman</a></p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>When I co-signed
+the <a href="/philosophy/ec_letter_mysql_oct19.pdf">letter objecting
+to Oracle's planned purchase of
+MySQL</a><sup><a href="#footnote">1</a></sup>
(along with the rest of
+Sun), some free software supporters were surprised that I approved of
+the practice of selling license exceptions which the MySQL developers
+have used. They expected me to condemn the practice outright. This
+article explains what I think of the practice, and
why.</p></strong></del></span>
+
+<p>Selling exceptions means that the copyright holder of the code
+releases it to the public under a free software license, then lets
+customers pay for permission to use the same code under different
+terms, for instance allowing its inclusion in proprietary
+applications.</p>
+
+<p>We must distinguish the practice of selling exceptions from something
+crucially different: purely proprietary extensions or versions of
+a free program. These two activities, even if practiced
+simultaneously by one company, are different issues. In selling
+exceptions, the same code that the exception applies to is available
+to the general public as free software. An extension or a modified
+version that is only available under a proprietary license is
+proprietary software, pure and simple, and <span
class="removed"><del><strong>no better than</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>just as wrong as</em></ins></span> any other
+proprietary software. This article is concerned with cases that
+involve strictly and only the sale of exceptions.</p>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>We must also distinguish selling
exceptions from dual licensing,
+which means releasing the program under a choice of licenses. With
+dual licensing, each user can choose to use the program under either
+one of the licenses, or under both in parallel for activities that fit
+both. (Thus, redistributors normally pass along both of the
+licenses.) For instance, Perl was distributed for many years under a
+dual license whose alternatives were the GNU GPL and the Artistic
+License. That is not necessary any more because version 2 of the
+Artistic License is compatible with the GNU GPL.</p>
+
+<p>In selling exceptions, the exception's terms are not a second
+license that the program is released under. Rather, they are
+available only to those users that buy an exception. The only license
+that the release carries is the GNU GPL, so this is not dual
+licensing.</p>
+
+<p>We must distinguish selling of exceptions from the usual kind of
+“exception to the GPL,” which simply gives all users
+permission to go beyond the GPL's conditions in some specific way.
+These exceptions are governed by section 7 of the GNU GPL. Selling
+exceptions is legally independent of the GNU GPL. To avoid confusion
+it is best not to refer to exceptions that are sold as
+“exceptions to the GPL.”</p></em></ins></span>
+
+<p>I've considered selling exceptions acceptable since the 1990s, and on
+occasion I've suggested it to companies. Sometimes this approach has
+made it possible for important programs to become free software.</p>
+
+<p>The KDE desktop was developed in the 90s based on the Qt library. Qt
+was proprietary software, and TrollTech charged for permission to
+embed it in proprietary applications. TrollTech allowed gratis use of
+Qt in free applications, but this did not make it free/libre software.
+Completely free operating systems therefore could not include Qt, so
+they could not use KDE either.</p>
+
+<p>In 1998, the management of TrollTech recognized that they could
+make Qt free software and continue charging for permission to embed it
+in proprietary software. I do not recall whether the suggestion came
+from me, but I certainly was happy to see the change, which made it
+possible to use Qt and thus KDE in the free software world.</p>
+
+<p>Initially, they used their own license, the Q Public License
+(QPL)—quite restrictive as free software licenses go, and
+incompatible with the GNU GPL. Later they switched to the GNU GPL; I
+think I had explained to them that it would work for the purpose.</p>
+
+<p>Selling exceptions depends fundamentally on using a copyleft
+license, such as the GNU GPL, for the free software release. A
+copyleft license permits embedding in a larger program only if the
+whole combined program is released under that license; this is how it
+ensures extended versions will also be free. Thus, users that want to
+make the combined program proprietary need special permission. Only
+the copyright holder can grant that, and selling exceptions is one
+style of doing so. Someone else, who received the code under the GNU
+GPL or another copyleft license, cannot grant an exception.</p>
+
+<p>When I first heard of the practice of selling exceptions, I asked
+myself whether the practice is ethical. If someone buys an exception
+to embed a program in a larger proprietary program, he's doing
+something wrong (namely, making proprietary software). Does it follow
+that the developer that sold the exception is doing something wrong
+too?</p>
+
+<p>If that implication <span
class="removed"><del><strong>is</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>were</em></ins></span> valid, it would also apply to
releasing the
+same program under a noncopyleft free software license, such as the
+X11 license. That also permits such embedding. So either we have to
+conclude that it's wrong to release anything under the X11
+license—a conclusion I find unacceptably extreme—or reject
+<span class="removed"><del><strong>this</strong></del></span>
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em>the</em></ins></span> implication. Using a
noncopyleft license is weak,
+and <span class="removed"><del><strong>usually</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em><a
href="/licenses/license-recommendations.html">usually</em></ins></span> an
+inferior <span class="removed"><del><strong>choice,</strong></del></span>
<span class="inserted"><ins><em>choice</a>,</em></ins></span> but it's
not wrong.</p>
+
+<p>In other words, selling exceptions permits limited embedding of the
+code in proprietary software, but the X11 license goes even further,
+permitting unlimited use of the code (and modified versions of it) in
+proprietary software. If this doesn't make the X11 license
+unacceptable, it doesn't make selling exceptions unacceptable.</p>
+
+<p>There are three reasons why the FSF doesn't practice selling
+exceptions. One is that it doesn't lead to the FSF's goal: assuring
+freedom for each user of our software. That's what we wrote the GNU
+GPL for, and the way to achieve this most thoroughly is to release
+under GPL version 3-or-later and not allow embedding in proprietary
+software. Selling exceptions wouldn't achieve this, just as release
+under the X11 license wouldn't. So normally we don't do either of
+those <span class="removed"><del><strong>things. We</strong></del></span>
<span class="inserted"><ins><em>things: we</em></ins></span> release under the
GPL only.</p>
+
+<p>Another reason we release only under the GPL is so as not to permit
+proprietary extensions that would present practical advantages over
+our free programs. Users for whom freedom is not a value might choose
+those non-free versions rather than the free programs they are based
+on—and lose their freedom. We don't want to encourage that.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><p>But there</strong></del></span>
+
+<span class="inserted"><ins><em><p>There</em></ins></span> are
occasional cases where, for specific reasons of
+strategy, we decide that using a more permissive license on a certain
+program is better for the cause of freedom. In those cases, we
+release the program to everyone under that permissive license.</p>
+
+<p>This is because of another ethical principle that the FSF follows:
+to treat all users the same. An idealistic campaign for freedom
+should not discriminate, so the FSF is committed to giving the same
+license to all users. The FSF never sells exceptions; whatever
+license or licenses we release a program under, that is available to
+everyone.</p>
+
+<p>But we need not insist that companies follow that principle. I
+consider selling exceptions an acceptable thing for a company to do,
+and I will suggest it where appropriate as a way to get programs
+freed.</p>
+
+<span class="removed"><del><strong><h4>Footnotes</h4>
+
+<p id="footnote">This is a local copy of the document
+from <a
href="http://keionline.org/sites/default/files/ec_letter_mysql_oct19.pdf">its
+original location</a>.</p></strong></del></span>
+
+</div><!-- for id="content", starts in the include above -->
+<!--#include virtual="/server/footer.html" -->
+<div id="footer">
+<div class="unprintable">
+
+<p>Please send general FSF & GNU inquiries to <a
+href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>. There are
also <a
+href="/contact/">other ways to contact</a> the FSF. Broken links and
other
+corrections or suggestions can be sent to <a
+href="mailto:address@hidden"><address@hidden></a>.</p>
+
+<p><!-- TRANSLATORS: Ignore the original text in this paragraph,
+ replace it with the translation of these two:
+
+ We work hard and do our best to provide accurate, good quality
+ translations. However, we are not exempt from imperfection.
+ Please send your comments and general suggestions in this regard
+ to <a href="mailto:address@hidden">
+ <address@hidden></a>.</p>
+
+ <p>For information on coordinating and submitting translations of
+ our web pages, see <a
+ href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
+ README</a>. -->
+Please see the <a
+href="/server/standards/README.translations.html">Translations
README</a> for
+information on coordinating and submitting translations of this
article.</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Copyright © 2009, 2010, 2015, <span
class="removed"><del><strong>2016</strong></del></span> <span
class="inserted"><ins><em>2016, 2017</em></ins></span> Richard
Stallman</p>
+
+<p>This page is licensed under a <a rel="license"
+href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/4.0/">Creative
+Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International
License</a>.</p>
+
+<!--#include virtual="/server/bottom-notes.html" -->
+
+<p class="unprintable">Updated:
+<!-- timestamp start -->
+$Date: 2017/04/09 14:59:49 $
+<!-- timestamp end -->
+</p>
+</div>
+</div>
+</body>
+</html>
+</pre></body></html>
| [Prev in Thread] |
Current Thread |
[Next in Thread] |
- www/philosophy selling-exceptions.de.html selli...,
GNUN <=