Stefan Monnier <monn...@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote: > > Note that this is a safety measure for the submitter: If the code > > is, indeed, released to the public, it is (dual licesed) GPL, > > anyway, even if that might not have been the intent. > > No. If the submitter did not explicitly release his code under the > GPL, then it is not licensed under the GPL, even if is a derivative of > GPL code. Instead, it is a breach of the GPL license and the > submitter is exposing himself to a civil suit. > ...I think for the majority of non-commercial developers (and even a lot of companies), the net result is the same.
-- (c) this sig last receiving data processing entity. Inspect headers for copyright history. All rights reserved. Copying, hiring, renting, performance and/or quoting of this signature prohibited. _______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe