> On 14-Jun-00, 02:31 (CDT), Pablo Baena <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It is just one step required for non-free software to become
> > propietary in some cases. i.e.: wine. It had some kind of home-made
> > license and then went to the BSD license. The guy owning wine could
> > just sell wine to any company, and nobody would be in position to do
> > nothing about it.
For the record, Wine has recently switched to an X11 style
license. http://kt.linuxcare.com/wine/wn20000501_41.epl#2
Chris Pimlott
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- why not replace individual programs? David N. Welton
- Re: why not replace individual programs? Christian Surchi
- Re: why not replace individual progra... Goswin Brederlow
- Re: why not replace individual pr... Radovan Garabik
- Re: why not replace individua... Pablo Baena
- Re: why not replace indi... Brian Mays
- Re: why not replace ... Pablo Baena
- Re: why not repl... Steve Greenland
- Re: why not repl... Chris Pimlott
- Re: why not replace individual pr... Miguel Wooding SF Ten.Union
- Re: why not replace individua... Chris Lawrence
- Re: why not replace indi... Chris Pimlott
- Re: why not replace ... Steve Greenland
- Re: why not repl... Radovan Garabik
- Re: why not repl... Peter S Galbraith
- Re: why not repl... Radovan Garabik
- Re: why not repl... Peter S Galbraith
- Re: why not repl... David N. Welton
- Re: why not replace individua... Colin Watson

