(Following-up to my own post is a sign of what?) Chris Gray wrote:
> Secondly, although I responded positively to Mark's suggestions regarding > GPL-compatibility, it is still possible that our management would decide > that > protecting our trademark is more important, and that it is essential to have > the > trademark clause -in- the licence, not next to it. IANAL, TINLA, etc.. O.K., I've hoofed it from desk to desk and Clause 4 is now gone. The only diff between our licence and revised BSD now is a request (-not- a requirement) to submit any improvements or extensions and to grant ACUNIA NV the rights to redistribute these changes. So I guess we're now GPL compatible. Regards Chris Gray VM Architect, ACUNIA _______________________________________________ Classpath mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath
