On 2009-04-17, Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@xxxxxxxxxxx> claimed:
> Phil Da Lick! wrote:
>
>> Sinister Midget wrote:
>>> On 2009-04-17, Erik Jan <Erik@xxxxxxxxx> claimed:
>>> If it's reverse-engineered and not the original code, I don't see a
>>> problem with it. Using GPLed code directly wouldn't allow them to close
>>> the source. This way they can get away with it. But they'd have to
>>> alter a few things or it might be a problem.
>>>
>>> I smell a GPL V4 to prevent it. That would make the move even more
>>> controversial than going to GPL V3 was.
>>>
>>
>> Getting that GPL4 adopted would be difficult.
>
> It would be next to impossible.
> GPL3 is already going too far
That doesn't mean it won't be tried. Not if somebody thinks they can
work out a way to prevent $MONOPOLY from benefitting while exempting
the rest of the world.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------
Eee PC900 16G SSD 2G RAM Ubuntu 9.04
----------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not rude, I'm "attitudinally challenged".
----------------------------------------------------------------
Eee-linux: Workin' like a champ!
----------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
