In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The "no charge" clause is for _licensing_, >And licensing to do what? To distribute further copies of your copy, not to receive a copy in the first place. You don't need a licence to receive and use a copy. A can charge B for a copy of GNU Emacs, but he can't charge B for the right to give a copy to C. But of course Terekhov knows this, he is just trying to muddy the waters. -- Richard _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list gnu-misc-discuss@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
