On 22 May 2002, at 14:28, Dave wrote:
> > . > (...) > Aye. And if I send 100 Euros to TT, I can get SMSQ, Oh? That's news to me. >mod it any way I see fit, Only if you are allowed to do so explicitly. >and sell those new versions under the first sale doctrine, outside of > the license, as they're licensed copies. Can of worms. :/ Again, only if you are allowed to do so. > And have the ability to test it on any and every hardware combination, or > on hardware that may itself be under development and changing ten times a > day. That can hardly be expected, especially if you are developping new hardware which the registrar hasn't got. Hence the provision for test versions... > I agree with you 'mostly', that the emphasis of debate is on the wrong > things, but the things you discuss are not worded in the license, and the > things that *are* worded in the license are the rules under which we must > work. Well, basiclly, the licence allows you to: - get the source code - change it in any way you like - (re)compile it and use it - give away the source code, including your changes (on disk only for the moment) - give away the binaries to a max of 10 persions for testing purposes only (distributed any way you like). What you are NOT allowed to do is distribute the binaries, for free or otherwise (except the test versions). If you WANT to, you can submit your code to the registrar for inclusion in the official versions and binaries. Is that really so bad? > It is only natural for someone to try and get the best working environment > possible, be they user, developer, reseller or God! ;) Of course it is. You might also accept that the working environment is not quite exactly what you want. What I regret is that people tell me that the "restricted" licence as it stands now stops them from making contributions. Wolfgang
