or both together... -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Angelo Sarto Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 08:59 To: James Weatherall Cc: Bob Smith; Kyle McDonald; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] Subject: Re: What good is VNC's GPL?
My apologies for the misinformation then, it can be pursued by *any* copyright holder. I guess in this case tightvnc is a derived work of realvnc, so either one would have the option of pursuing this. --Angelo On Apr 5, 2005 7:48 AM, James Weatherall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Angelo, > > I'm afraid you are incorrect. The copyright holders in this instance are > numerous and include RealVNC Ltd. Relatively speaking, only a small > proportion of the TightVNC codebase is actually specific to TightVNC. > > Regards, > > Wez @ RealVNC Ltd. > > > > However, if this matter is a violation then the orginazation > > that initates the action has to be the copyright holder whos > > licensing is being violated In this case this would be the > > tightvnc group, who can choose to ask the FSF for help if > > necessary. _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list [email protected] To remove yourself from the list visit: http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list _______________________________________________ VNC-List mailing list [email protected] To remove yourself from the list visit: http://www.realvnc.com/mailman/listinfo/vnc-list
