> Case in point with FC: Say the FC community
> releases FC to the public under the GPL.
> And, say the FC community releases FC to
> MetaCard under a different license.
Alain: In my view, MetaCard will merely bundle the
open-source FC-GUI as a community-based alternative to
their own. And they are rightfully allowed to do so,
just as any other outfit wishing to sell FC can do so
also.
> I was under the impression we were only licencing
> the Home stack to MetaCard specially?
Alain: I do not believe that we will have a separate
licence specifically tailored for our dealings with
MetaCard. Why should they accept other licencing terms
when they can legitimately get the same free licence
as everyone else?
> Don't they already have an engine;
Alain: Rhetorical question, eh!
> why would they want ours?
Alain: They don't.
> I think we should get the terms strait, less this
> discussion get quite confusing.
Alain: For what it is worth, here are some guidelines
for everyone in the group in order to avoid confusion:
1. Write clearly
2. Re-read what you have written
3. Check your spelling
4. Check your grammar
5. Check for completeness (any omissions?)
6. Restate some/all of the implicit stuff
7. Cite only what is needed for context-preservation
8. Respond to one item at a time
9. Respond to the item instead of rambling-on
10. ... etc ...
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com
