Subject: Re: Cygwin license
From: Steve Morris <[email-masked]>
To: DJ Delorie <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
Date: Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:43:02 -0500 (EST)

DJ Delorie writes:
 > 
 > > There has to be a way of legally allowing people to give binaries away
 > > while still charging the people selling commercial packages.
 > 
 > What's the difference?  Just cost?

Specifically it should be possible for people to legally provide a
service of compiling to binaries software that people already have a
legal right to use. It is silly that Andy Piper, Earnie, Sergey et al
are in technical violation of cygwin licensing terms when they are
merely saving the rest of us time and effort.

 > >From a license point of view, we can certainly add whatever extra
 > exceptions we want, or even write a whole new one.  However, at the
 > moment, the license is GPL, so that's what we all have to abide by.

We agree on everything except the interpretation of the GPL under the
laws of the US. However that is a separate issue which I personally
would be happy to drop having no vested interest in the
conversation. I only insist on not being misinterpreted. I don't care
if anyone agrees. That's what makes a horse race interesting.

--
Want to unsubscribe from this list?
Send a message to [email-masked]