Jörn Nettingsmeier wrote: > [snip] > > all this means that if somebody uses GPL'd code without releasing under > GPL him/herself, s/he is in breach of contract with the original > author(s). it *does* *not* *mean* that you can now assume the entire > package is up for grabs under the terms of the GPL.
IANAL, but with a certainty of 99,9% this is the actual state of affairs how German courts does accept/fit the GPL to the German law and it seems to be the same for the Netherlands, because of a similar copyright law that someone from the list described and it seems to be the same for the USA and nearly every country, if I didn't misunderstood clarifications on English. First I thought that some issues might differ, but now I completely agree. This is how clarifications on German and English "translate" the legal terminology of the GPL. Ralf _______________________________________________ Linux-audio-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxaudio.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-audio-dev
