On 2013-09-26, at 03:37 , Herbert Duerr <[email protected]> wrote: > I find it interesting that in this case Apple acts as the redistributor of > GPL material as the GPL has some redistribution clauses that other companies > with significant intellectual property portfolios would be much more cautious > about.
Me, too. There are other instances where FOSS is on the store, but not many, and I think the others use non-GPL licenses. However, a crucial point is not per se the license, I think, though you are correct about the clauses issue (not sure how it's resolved here but I don't really want to pressure it), as copyright ownership or at least the guarantee (tacit or explicit) that the binaries posted are not actually stolen objects. -louis --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
