Re: Licences

[Niklas Holsti <nobody@nowhere.fi>]

Larry Kilgallen wrote:
> In article <87ach6ecah.fsf@ludovic-brenta.org>, Ludovic Brenta <ludovic@ludovic-brenta.org> writes:
> 
>>Martin Dowie <martin.dowie@btopenworld.com> writes:
>>
>>>Marco wrote:
>>>...on one hand the GPL is ultimately what 'Free' Software is all about, 
>>>isn't it? And when you hear of companies sticking satellites into space 
>>>using GNAT _3.15p_ then there is clearly revenue there that they are 
>>>just not getting (and need as much as any other business).
>>
>>OTOH, such companies would be perfectly happy with GNAT GPL 2005
>>Edition, since they don't really distribute their software to anyone -
>>they just dispatch it, physically, into orbit :)
> 
> 
> No, most of them transfer it to the US Government, who do the launch.

Except for most of the satellites built in Europe, Russia, Japan, 
China, India and Australia, of course (did I forget someone?). If 
their SW really ends up in the US Government, the Echelon spy 
network is better than I thought ;-)

> Most space companies do not launch their own product.

True. But the launch is often just a third-party service; the 
ultimate owner of the satellite is often not the launch 
organization, but a satellite-communications company, for example.

-- 
Niklas Holsti
Tidorum Ltd
niklas holsti tidorum fi
       .      @       .