| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
GCC unpluggedGCC unpluggedPosted Nov 23, 2007 7:15 UTC (Fri) by giraffedata (subscriber, #1954)In reply to: GCC unplugged by gmaxwell Parent article: GCC unplugged
It's true that someone could still distribute the proprietary extensions *without GCC*, and "only a judge could decide" that the proprietary work work still infringed on the GCC license I have to correct the terminology here, because as it stands is reinforces the popular misconception that a copyright license is something that stops you from copying code. There's no such thing as infringing on a license. It should say, "... that distributing the proprietary work infringed on the GCC copyright." but when we're talking about proprietary extensions, the separate distribution case isn't what most people are thinking of...Hmm. To me, that's what plugins are all about -- selling a plugin for use with the customer's independently acquired GCC.
(Log in to post comments)
|
|
||||||||||||