On Wed, 23 Oct 2013, Les Mikesell wrote: > On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 10:17 AM, Charlie Brady > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 5:35 AM, Gordon Rowell <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> >> > >> >> Has anyone actually owned the community version of e-smith/SME? When > >> >> Mitel bought e-smith, I bet they were mainly buying the people, > >> >> intangibles, > >> >> and marketing engine of e-smith. Most all of the code was/is GPL. > >> > > >> > The GPL is a license under which code is released by the copyright > >> > holder. > >> > >> The GPL explicitly states that anyone can modify and redistribute > >> copies as long as the license terms are maintained. So it is odds > >> with the normal concepts of ownership. > > > > No, it is orthogonal to ownership. > > Technically true, but in practice it means that non-owners have the > same rights as owners except in rare circumstances. So it makes > ownership meaningless.
Thats just pure BS, Les. Owners maintain full rights. The GPL only grants limited rights to licensees. > Which makes a change from GPL difficult/unlikely. And you can't > really overlook the fact that the bulk of the included code comes from > another Linux distribution whose redistribution terms make things like > SME possible - and whose ongoing updates constitute much of the value. I don't think any of those things is under discussion. --- Charlie _______________________________________________ Discussion about project organisation and overall direction To unsubscribe, e-mail [email protected] Searchable archive at http://lists.contribs.org/mailman/public/discussion/
