On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 11:03 AM, Charlie Brady
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> 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.
What is the owner of one component of a GPL'd work (where there are
other components and owners involved) permitted to do that a non-owner
could not? Without replacing all of the other GPL'd components,
anyway... The point of the GPL is to give everyone the same rights
and restrictions.
--
Les Mikesell
[email protected]
_______________________________________________
Discussion about project organisation and overall direction
To unsubscribe, e-mail [email protected]
Searchable archive at http://lists.contribs.org/mailman/public/discussion/
