Mail Archives: cygwin/1997/02/14/11:24:11
assini AT kamus DOT it (Pasqualino Assini) writes:
> If 16.1 or something similar is still LGPLed couldn't we
>
> (by we I mean those who don't find it amusing to see
> cygnus.dll becoming a commercial product)
>
> just start a new developement thread from it and keep it LGPLed ?
>
> Or cygnus can retrospectively change the status of a version
> from LGPL to GPL ?
Much of the older code has no explicit terms on it at all, which means
that it is by default "all rights reserved". I don't think there's
any problem with hacking away on it as a personal project, but any
honest and knowledgeable lawyer would tell you to stay miles away from
it for a commercial product. After all, perhaps Cygnus might get
bought by AT&T or something, and they would decide to exercise their
rights and go after commercial products using old cygwin32 stuff.
(Knowledgeable lawyers should be able to quote you plenty of similar
cases - for instance, the Symbolics code grab that was one of the
impetuses for RMS starting GNU in the first place, or the contention
over Berkeley sources.)
Stan
- Raw text -