On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 10:05 +0100, Ron Arts wrote: > > Well, IANAL but I think this has not been tested in court, and there > is no way you can be sure you can get away with it. > Being devil's advocate I could make a case this is just plain fraud.
I dont think forking the code is fraud and any claim they have that it is, when it was *them* that chose to release under the gpl which specifically allows forks to occur would be very questionable. I wouldnt want to be the test case either, however if they dont like the gpl they shouldnt have picked it. How can they in all honesty sue postgress for a gpl violation and then say the gpl doesnt apply to the very same code when they are on the other side of the fence? -- Trixter http://www.0xdecafbad.com Bret McDanel UK +44 870 340 4605 Germany +49 801 777 555 3402 US +1 360 207 0479 or +1 516 687 5200 FreeWorldDialup: 635378 http://www.sacaug.org/ Sacramento Asterisk Users Group
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Biz mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-biz
