Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 15th Aug 2007 21:37 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 264100
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/17/13 23:35 UTC, submitted by kragil
Linked by MOS6510 on 05/17/13 22:22 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-10-02
All versions of the GPL prevents changing the license for those who have already received the software under the GPL and it clearly states so.
You are EITHER spreading lies right now OR spreading bullshit because you don't know better.
The GPL has always prevented changing the license for those who have acquired the software under the GPL.
It is a perpetual license and it clearly states so.
BTW: Microsoft can only change the license at any given time because the license agreement says so. If the license agreement did not clearly state Microsoft has the right to change the license at any given momemt, then Microsoft would not have such a right. Microsoft is in its EULA reserving the right to change the license at any given time. However, the GPL does not allow for such a thing. It is perpetual just like the GNU Free Documentation License which Wikipedia is using.
Your legal understanding is embarrassingly flawed.
Edited 2007-08-17 08:22 UTC