Mailing-List:	contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Subscribe:	<mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive:	<http://sources.redhat.com/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post:	<mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help:	<mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sources.redhat.com/ml/#faqs>
Sender:	cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To:	mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Date:	Fri, 21 Dec 2001 11:47:42 -0500
From:	Christopher Faylor <cgf AT redhat DOT com>
To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Subject:	Re: Distribution
Message-ID:	<20011221164742.GK13470@redhat.com>
Reply-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To:	cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
References:	<17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E3E9 AT IIS000>
Mime-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<17B78BDF120BD411B70100500422FC6309E3E9@IIS000>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.3.23.1i

On Fri, Dec 21, 2001 at 02:38:57PM +0100, Bernard Dautrevaux wrote:
>>If you are in compliance with the licensing of each of the packages
>>that you will be releasing (including the cygwin DLL) then you should
>>be ok.  I can only speak in a semi-official capacity for cygwin.  The
>>other packages have their own licensing terms.  I assume that adhering
>>to the GPL should satisfy all of the licensing terms but I don't know
>>for sure.
>>
>>If you want to be 100% sure of that fact, then you should contact a
>>lawyer.
>
>
>Note that if you put full sources with the binaries, you provide your
>user with everything that RedHat provides with the binary; so either
>you are compliant or RedHat is not :-)
>
>Just my .02euro

Your .02euro is worth exactly as much as mine.  Neither of us is a
lawyer.  If someone is asking for advice on how to be legally correct
then they should seek appropriate counsel.

cgf

--
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
Bug reporting:         http://cygwin.com/bugs.html
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/

- Raw text -