That means, well, M$ is licensing the gnu/linux OS; which M$ cannot do
unless it conforms to the GNU GPL, which means the viral clause in GPL
applies to M$ patents!!!
The clause refering to a royalty-free, non-discriminatory, licence to use
any applicable patents is in GPLv3 and not GPLv2,
Lokesh Bhog [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
How does this pact affect Linux?
Bad for Microsoft's FUD campaign against Gnu/linux.
According to groklaw, Dell purchased licenses for Suse enterprise
Linux from Microsoft, NOT from Novell.
That means, well, M$ is licensing the gnu/linux OS; which M$
Mahesh T. Pai wrote:
That means, well, M$ is licensing the gnu/linux OS; which M$ cannot do
unless it conforms to the GNU GPL, which means the viral clause in GPL
applies to M$ patents!!!
Microsoft cannot change the license of GPL software. I am sure there
lawyers understand this more than
Quoting Mahesh T. Pai [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
unless it conforms to the GNU GPL, which means the viral clause in GPL
since when did GPL become viral?
kg
___
ilugd mailinglist -- ilugd@lists.linux-delhi.org
http://frodo.hserus.net/mailman/listinfo/ilugd
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Quoting Mahesh T. Pai [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
unless it conforms to the GNU GPL, which means the
viral clause in GPL
since when did GPL become viral?
Since its inception.
regrds
VK
Engineers normally have problem with every solution. If not they have a
On 10-May-07, at 9:57 AM, vivek khurana wrote:
Quoting Mahesh T. Pai [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
unless it conforms to the GNU GPL, which means the
viral clause in GPL
since when did GPL become viral?
Since its inception.
does RMS know?
--
regards
Kenneth Gonsalves
Associate, NRC-FOSS
[EMAIL
