__/ [ Peter Köhlmann ] on Saturday 27 January 2007 18:12 \__
> Damian O'Leary wrote:
>
>> amicus_curious wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> "Roy Schestowitz" <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
>>> news:1556066.oDeAeoZITj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>>> Novell Receives NASDAQ Notice of Non-compliance
>>>>
>>>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>>> | Novell today announced that, as expected, it received an additional
>>>> | notice of non-compliance from the staff of the NASDAQ Stock Market,
>>>> | pursuant to NASDAQ marketplace rule 4310(c)(14), due to the delay in
>>>> | filing its annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended Oct.
>>>> | 31, 2006 (the "Form 10-K").
>>>> `----
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>
http://www.boursorama.com/infos/actualites/detail_actu_societes.phtml?news=3920894
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Title could also be:
>>>>
>>>> "Novell Receives GPL Notice of Non-compliance"
>>>>
>>>> The GPLv3 will handle Novell, but the kernel, unlike some projects such
>>>> as Samba, is likely to stick with GPLv2.
>>>
>>> How could any change ever occur in anything already under GPLv2? The GPL
>>> says:
>>>
>>> "6. Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on the
>>> Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the
>>> original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to
>>> these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further
>>> restrictions on the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein.
>>> You are not responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to
>>> this License."
>>>
>>> Since any new version of, say, Samba would be based on the previous GPL
>>> v2 version of Samba, "these terms and conditions" must apply to the
>>> derivative as well.
>>
>>
>> The GPL is a joke. Its why the majority of businesses wont touch Linux
>> with a barge pole. And the SW companies wont make Linux SW because they
>> dont want to give their SW source away since MOST of their income (in the
>> real world) is made on support contracts for ecr's.
>
> Poor little widiot
> Please explain why writing linux software automatically means opening the
> source. Be very specific
>
> You are full of it. As usual
They are just doing their job. The worst we can do it feed them.
--
List of candidate Microsoft astroturfers (directly or indirectly paid by
Microsoft to post in this newsgroup):
Larry Qualig (former Microsoft employee)
Scott Nudds (AKA Vistaking)
Erik Funkenbusch (formerly an anti-OS/2 astroturfer)
flatfish+++
Damian O'Leary (AKA Hadron Quark)
Nedd Ludd
Tim Smith
amicus_curious
OK
DFS
Lintard
Terry
Ana Thema
Take everything posted by the individuals above with grain of salt. Microsoft
has already been caught paying forum members to spread lies about rivals,
e.g. http://worldcadaccess.typepad.com/gizmos/2005/11/2_grassroots_an.html
|
|
