Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 28th Oct 2010 20:07 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Thread beginning with comment 447565
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 06/20/13 6:17 UTC, submitted by MOS6510
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 23:02 UTC, submitted by M.Onty
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/19/13 22:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Anonymous on 06/18/13 22:26 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 22:25 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/18/13 17:32 UTC, submitted by poundsmack
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:58 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 06/17/13 17:52 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-11-19
There are two issues.
One is the file is re-published in a different license. (Remember the discussion where BSD code was found in Linux kernel code? It would be OK to copy the code, even relicense under GPL, only if they had attributed to the original author. But an employee wanted to take the credit).
The second one is with patents (subject of the other lawsuit). Even if you publish your code under GPL, there are some limitations due to patents (this is why we have GPL3 changed that provisions).