From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham
	autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 103376,60086334c984dfc2
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
X-Google-ArrivalTime: 2001-07-19 14:49:23 PST
Path: 
 archiver1.google.com!newsfeed.google.com!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: dewar@gnat.com (Robert Dewar)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: Re: The Ada Developers Cooperative License (was Re: RE:)
Date: 19 Jul 2001 14:49:22 -0700
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Message-ID: <5ee5b646.0107191349.76ca3cd7@posting.google.com>
References: <mailman.995392315.19704.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org>
 <9j1v7e$8ik$1@nh.pace.co.uk>
 <5ee5b646.0107172350.1d6ef192@posting.google.com>
 <KMGHpckQ7iTM@eisner.encompasserve.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 208.224.77.203
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 995579362 9607 127.0.0.1 (19 Jul 2001 21:49:22
 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-support@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 19 Jul 2001 21:49:22 GMT
Xref: archiver1.google.com comp.lang.ada:10286
Date: 2001-07-19T21:49:22+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam (Larry Kilgallen) wrote in message news:<KMGHpckQ7iTM@eisner.encompasserve.org>...

> Whereas if I were looking for more discussion of this, I would look
> for a source less biased than either of the two cited above.

Well if you have a license from someone, it makes sense to read what
*they* think the license says, since they have spent $$$$ with their
lawyers to make sure that the license says what they want. The GPL
FAQ is a very useful description of the details of the GPL. Sure,
if you want to pay an independent attorney lots of $$$ to look at
it and give a supplementary opinion, you can certainly do so, but
for most people, the plain language discussions in the FAQ will be
a useful addition to the legalese in the GPL.

The FAQ represents a consensus position and has been reviewed by a lot
of people, and I have not read of any instance of anyone specifically
contesting any of the statements in this FAQ.

Larry, try reading it and see what you think, I am guessing that the
above statement was made without having bothered to look at the FAQ.