Recent Features
| |||||||||||||
FSF should separate GPLv3 changes (Linux.com)FSF should separate GPLv3 changes (Linux.com)Posted Oct 18, 2006 4:59 UTC (Wed) by beoba (guest, #16942)In reply to: FSF should separate GPLv3 changes (Linux.com) by svkelley Parent article: FSF should separate GPLv3 changes (Linux.com)
Then don't use GPLed code. Problem solved.
(Log in to post comments)
FSF should separate GPLv3 changes (Linux.com) Posted Oct 18, 2006 6:37 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806) [Link] GPLv3, love it or leave it!!
FSF should separate GPLv3 changes (Linux.com) Posted Oct 18, 2006 11:04 UTC (Wed) by arcticwolf (guest, #8341) [Link] Same for the GPLv2, or, in fact, any software license on the market. If you don't like the license I put *my* code under, then don't use it. Read up on copyright law instead, and here's some cheese to go with your whine.Seriously, I have no idea where people get the idea that they're *entitled* to someone else's code. It's me who chooses to make it available - I'm making you an offer. Take it or leave it, but don't complain that I'm being unfair when I'm giving you my work for free.
|
|||||||||||||