On Thursday 07 April 2005 16:29, Brian J. Murrell wrote: > On Thu, 2005-04-07 at 16:23 +0200, Stef Coene wrote: > > Or he can compile his own binary's and resell the HMC, there is nothing > > they can do about it. > > Yes, he may distribute his own modified (I don't think making a > modification is even a requirement) HMC, however don't omit the > importance of the point: > > That he too must make his (modified) source code available to anyone he > makes a binary available to and anyone receiving that source code can > contribute any of the diffs back upstream, release the whole source for > free availability, or he too can turn around and make another "HMC" > product with all of the same obligations. I'ts even worse, if you use the GPL'ed myth library and use it in your not-GPL'ed product, you have to relase ALL code under the GPL license. That's why they call the GPL a viral license.
For those who are bored, I will stop this thread. There are numerous sites around license issues. My favorite is the discussions that sometimes happens on /. (http://slashdot.org). End of discussion: http://www.d1.com.au is doing nothing wrong. You can only ask them polite if they will join this list and share some knowledge. Stef
_______________________________________________ mythtv-users mailing list [email protected] http://mythtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mythtv-users
