Re: revised GPL?

2000-11-02 Thread kmself
on Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 07:18:28PM -0400, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Your message has engaged my curiosity. Why are discussions about open source/FSF licenses being held in secret? It seems to me that we all should be informed of not only the status of these

revised GPL?

2000-10-28 Thread Laura Majerus
Does anybody have any information on the status of the next version of the GPL that I have been hearing rumors about? (Sorry in advance about the stupid confidentiality banner!) Laura A. Majerus Fenwick West LLP 2 Palo Alto Square Palo Alto, CA 94306 Phone: 650-858-7152 Fax:650-494-1417

Re: revised GPL?

2000-10-28 Thread kmself
on Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 10:19:56AM -0700, Laura Majerus ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Does anybody have any information on the status of the next version of the GPL that I have been hearing rumors about? (Sorry in advance about the stupid confidentiality banner!) The best source of information

Re: revised GPL?

2000-10-28 Thread Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M.
odd to hear that they are an insider on an issue as important as this one is for the open source movement. Please enlighten us further. Rod - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 6:32 PM Subject: Re: revised GPL?

Re: revised GPL?

2000-10-28 Thread kmself
on Sat, Oct 28, 2000 at 07:18:28PM -0400, Rod Dixon, J.D., LL.M. ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Your message has engaged my curiosity. Why are discussions about open source/FSF licenses being held in secret? It seems to me that we all should be informed of not only the status of these