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=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID
	autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
X-Google-Thread: 1025b4,1d8ab55e71d08f3d
X-Google-Attributes: gid1025b4,public
X-Google-Thread: 103376,1efdd369be089610
X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public
From: rrw1000@cus.cam.ac.uk (Richard Watts)
Subject: Re: what DOES the GPL really say?
Date: 1997/07/01
Message-ID: <5pb8gf$j4m@lyra.csx.cam.ac.uk>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 253881485
References: <m2oh8ydzt8.fsf@devo.ridgenet.net> <5oqp9s$7vj$1@news.nyu.edu>
 <m2soy3kebq.fsf@devo.ridgenet.net> <dewar.867497844@merv>
Organization: University of Cambridge, England
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada,gnu.misc.discuss
Date: 1997-07-01T00:00:00+00:00
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>


In article <dewar.867497844@merv>, Robert Dewar <dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu> wrote:
>Ronald Cole said
>
><<I'd recommend that you find some other license agreement that would
>prevent someone from enhancing your code and then engaging in the
>following exercise of the "letter of the law":
>>>
>
>
[snip]
>
>Anyway, here is how we do things at ACT, just so it is clear to people.
>
>
>There are three kinds of versions of GNAT
[snip]

 Hmmm.. interesting. How would you cope with a customer who distributes
interim or wavefront releases to the world, possibly for a fee approaching
 your own ? As I see it, if you tried to restrict service to customers
who didn't redistribute the code you shipped them, you might be open
to a suit for constructive licensing ? How does the FSF feel about
this ?


[snip]


Richard.
[ who will now undoubtedly be flamed by absolutely everyone ... :-( ]
-- 
SAY AGAIN STOP IS USENET DEAD OR DECEASED STOP
The University of Cambridge can't have these opinions even if it wants them.