H.S. wrote: > Dotan Cohen wrote: > >> I will be honest, I am not too sure about the LGPL, but with regards >> to the GPL anyone can take the source, modify it if he chooses, and > > Interesting. Just curious, does it prohibit distributing binaries as well?
Doesn't look like that. See the varous question regarding this in the section "Distribution of programs released under the GNU licenses" at http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.html. > >> redistribute it. Compiled binaries with additional IP, such as the Sun >> logo, are not fair game. Why do you think that Debian abandoned > > If those additional IP and Sun logos are not LGPL or GPL, then if those > are excluded it should make no difference to the rest of the source > code, would it? If they are LGPL or GPL, it should make no difference at > all! The only problem I see can be if Sun's logo are not free to be distributed. In that case they would just need to spitted out of the application (same thing happened to Firefox in Debian). > > >> Firefox for Iceweasel? Mozilla was getting all pissy about their >> Firefox-branded software being redistributed with modifications that >> they did not approve of. >> > > I don't think Firefox was LGPL or GPL, was it? Or perhaps their logos > were not. (I am not clear about the details) FF is GPL and also LGPL. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mozilla_Firefox "Firefox's source code is free software, released under a tri-license GNU GPL/GNU LGPL/MPL." -- Please reply to this list only. I read this list on its corresponding newsgroup on gmane.org. Replies sent to my email address are just filtered to a folder in my mailbox and get periodically deleted without ever having been read. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
