Of course, if you own the entire copyright on your GPL application/code you don't have a problem.
Just require anyone that wants to run your application on Windows to buy a commercial liscence... It avoids the Microsoft liscence problem, and encourages people to move to linux, especially when you tell them that the version for Windows is exactly the same as the version for linux, and the only reason you have to charge them to use it on Windows is that Microsoft won't allow you to give them the program free ( beer and libre ). :) Of course, I'm being a little overly simplistics, but the tactic appeals to me, at least in a "send me a free pizza to use my program on Windows" kind of way. Adam -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Doug Foskey Sent: Thursday, 18 April 2002 1:17 PM To: SLUG List Subject: Re: [SLUG] (FWD) The Microsoft penalty that isn't - Tech News - CNET.com I agree (sometimes with KF. BUT, we could set up a check for 'M$' in the code, & so generate another 'BSofD' for M$. (They would be so silly they probably would never check for the foreign code enclosed - otherwise why dont they fix some of the existing bugs?? ) DF -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug -- SLUG - Sydney Linux User Group Mailing List - http://slug.org.au/ More Info: http://lists.slug.org.au/listinfo/slug
