On Tue, Mar 04, 2003 at 08:22:45AM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: > I remind everyone that even if the GPL applies, the below notice is more > restrictive as it prevents editing to reflect current status. Additionally, > the required notice does not include the warranty information, which may be > a GPL violation.
My personal interpretation is because there is no warranty information in the author supplied notice, then there is no notice worthy of (2)(c) consideration. If the author added the information required by (2)(c), then that would be a different story since nobody could simultaneously satisfy the GPL and Mr. Burzi's own addendums. I suggest that Mr. Burzi, along with his contributors, relicense to something simpler and more explicit, that conforms to his own personal wishes. Simon