On Sunday 12 November 2006 08:20, David Guest wrote: > This is good to hear, Andrew, but this > <http://ozdoc.mine.nu/argus/Argus%204.2.0%20License.html> is what I get > when I start the automatic installer for 4.2.0.
8<----------------------------------------------------------------------- (a) You must ensure that End Users do not make modifications or permit a third party to make modifications to the Software. (b) You must not grant or purport to grant a sub-licence or any rights in respect of the Software to any person. 8<------------------------------------------------------------------------ Even wearing the pinkest of glasses and the thickest coat of naive friendship I cannot say that these license statements are in any way even remotely compatible with the original GPL. In fact, the license looks like some obscenity straight out of Microsoft's book. Andrew, I think it is high time for either some upfront honesty or to get rid of confusing nonsense, whichever it is. If Argus is not free software (in the spirit of the GPL or any other OSF approved license), just say so. Else, please clarify how what David points out has come into existence and why it would not be legally binding? Horst (starting to look for a shovel to dig out the axe of war) _______________________________________________ Gpcg_talk mailing list [email protected] http://ozdocit.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gpcg_talk
