Doesn't look like a GPL violation to me. I think you need to actually READ the GPL.
The GPL governs and restricts distribution and work based on GPL software. It says nothing about having to release code or changes made to the public. I had a similar discussion recently on the vpopmail list. I think this may be a common misconception. -- Jesse Guardiani, Systems Administrator WingNET Internet Services, P.O. Box 2605 // Cleveland, TN 37320-2605 423-559-LINK (v) 423-559-5145 (f) http://www.wingnet.net We are actively looking for companies that do a lot of long distance faxing and want to cut their long distance bill by up to 50%. Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] for more info. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Eero Volotinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Tom Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 11:29 AM Subject: Re: [qmailadmin] Possible GPL violation in use of qmailadmin? > Screengrab is in address http://ping-viini.org/~eero/qmailadmin.png > > Define true violation? I think that is is GPL violation, if they are making > changes without > releasing changes to public. At least modified parts need to be avail in net > under GPL > licence. Since I am not a laywer, maybe some with *more* knowledge can > simplify > this case? > > Well. > > -- > Eero > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Tom Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "Eero Volotinen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2003 6:06 PM > Subject: Re: [qmailadmin] Possible GPL violation in use of qmailadmin? > > > > On Wednesday, February 26, 2003, at 08:27 AM, Eero Volotinen wrote: > > > Yes. This company is distributing, as least it is selled to some > > > companies. > > > > > > Company is http://www.finmill.com/ . I can send screen grab of this > > > modification if needed. > > > > I'm interested in seeing some screen grabs from their version. > > > > > You people can push this company release changes to public by sending > > > email > > > to addresses: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > If it's a true violation and they aren't interested in releasing their > > changes back to us, we can pursue some of the following steps (after > > giving them ample time to comply, of course): > > > > 1) Get a story about the violation posted to Slashdot. > > 2) Get the Free Software Foundation involved (I think they're the ones > > who help with GPL violations). > > 3) Obtain a copy of their source code (HTML/images) and integrate the > > changes ourselves. > > > > -- > > Tom Collins > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > >
