On Tue, Jun 21, 2011 at 11:29, Gerry Reno <gr...@verizon.net> wrote: > No, the burden of proof is on the entity that is claiming there was a > license violation. Not the other way round. > > And the courts are fairly lenient with new codebases. You can look at > any number of examples. SCO's failed lawsuit against Linux for example.
Gerry, Take it as serious as it is. Companies will put their reputation above our code and they using our code means that who disagree about the license change can put the project and companies using it in court. Like it or not. Think about what SCO did for many companies. The point is: do it right or doesn't do it. Or Cendio accepts to relicense their work for us or: * we keep using GPLv2 (I prefer against GPLv3 since some companies cannot use it); * we redo all work; As I said before we need to prove that our code is completely different. A difficult thing to do since all code today has a rdesktop code as parent (this is a simple "git log" of distance from you). -- Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems E-mail: ota...@ossystems.com.br http://www.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 53 9981-7854 http://projetos.ossystems.com.br ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ EditLive Enterprise is the world's most technically advanced content authoring tool. Experience the power of Track Changes, Inline Image Editing and ensure content is compliant with Accessibility Checking. http://p.sf.net/sfu/ephox-dev2dev _______________________________________________ Freerdp-devel mailing list Freerdp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/freerdp-devel
