On Sat, Jan 21, 2006 at 09:24:36PM +0200, Shlomi Fish wrote:
> I'm sorry, but Hetz is by no means required to release his source 
> modification 
> public according to the GPL or any other free software licence. That's 
> because the free software definition 
> ( http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html ) says that one has:
> 
> <<<
> The freedom to study how the program works, and adapt it to your needs 
> (freedom 1)
> >>>
> 
> So as long as you keep the modifications in-house and don't try to distribute 
> them to the public, you are not required to make them GPLed.

But where does it say it in the GPL? Saying one thing in the "philosophy"
section of a website, does not make it part of the license. I don't
doubt that's the intent, it's just not the license.

Geoff.

-- 
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel [EMAIL PROTECTED]  N3OWJ/4X1GM
IL Voice: (07)-7424-1667  IL Fax: 972-2-648-1443 U.S. Voice: 1-215-821-1838 
The trouble with being a futurist is that when people get around to believing
you, it's too late. We lost. Google 2,000,000:Hams 0. 

=================================================================
To unsubscribe, send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
the word "unsubscribe" in the message body, e.g., run the command
echo unsubscribe | mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to