Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com From: "Patrick J. LoPresti" Message-ID: To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Subject: Re: GPL violation ? References: <20040505182418 DOT R31761 AT unsane DOT co DOT uk> <20040505185724 DOT C31875 AT unsane DOT co DOT uk> <20040506155542 DOT GC27589 AT coe DOT bosbc DOT com> In-Reply-To: <20040506155542.GC27589@coe.bosbc.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.2 Date: 07 May 2004 17:53:50 -0400 Lines: 20 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Christopher Faylor writes: > As I am sure you know, mentioning the GPL always starts a Rube > Goldberg reaction of interpretation from would-be lawyers, zealots, > or people who are unsatisfied with following the rules and assume > they should have more rights to the software than the owners of the > software intend to provide. Good point. If only everybody had the same charming personality as you, we would not have such problems. What a shame! Maybe someday... Personally, I always follow the rules. I just think it is idiotic to enforce them on some poor academic distributing unmodified binaries whose source is widely available. On the other hand, if some corporation is making money distributing GPL'd code without source, they should clearly be nailed to the wall. Here's wishing the best to Red Hat's lawyers. - Pat "YANALATEYHSMBSI" LoPresti -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/