fun with GPL

[Scott Elcomb]

On 9/5/07, Jamon Camisso <jamon.camisso-H217xnMUJC0sA/PxXw9srA at public.gmane.org> wrote:
> You might point out that using contract law to violate the preexisting
> license is unacceptable, the whole point of the GPL is that you can't
> work around it in that manner. Ask if running "strings" counts as
> reverse engineering?

Funny, I've been looking at the LGPL and GPL 3 licenses; I'm
considering upgrading the license on Atomic OS to provide better
security (through code transparency) for "my" end users.

I've asked licensing-dGWS0fDw8IM at public.gmane.org if they have any comments or
recommendations on this, but haven't heard anything as yet.  I'm not
sure I'll get a response - they're a busy group of volunteers who
expect folks to do at least some of their homework.  (Part of the Free
and Open Source Software ethos, and a large part of why I believe
LUG's are "on the front line.")

Not trying to hijack the thread but does anyone (esp. project
maintainers) have any thoughts or suggestions about the upgrading of
licenses within their projects?

-- 
  Scott Elcomb
  http://www.psema4.com/
--
The Toronto Linux Users Group.      Meetings: http://gtalug.org/
TLUG requests: Linux topics, No HTML, wrap text below 80 columns
How to UNSUBSCRIBE: http://gtalug.org/wiki/Mailing_lists