Wine license change
tom-wine at redant.freeserve.co.uk
Thu Feb 14 11:58:44 CST 2002
On Thu, Feb 14, 2002 at 10:41:05AM -0700, Brett Glass wrote:
> At 01:38 AM 2/14/2002, Plato wrote:
[snip still unsubstantiated claim]
> >You keep on making unsubstantiated claims like this.
> You can find them as well as I can. Just go to Stallman's gnu.org
> site. However, because you seem to insist on having me do your
> research for you, Stallman actually says this in an essay called
Well actually it's your research because they are your claims. Do you not
know how debates work?
> "What is Copyleft." Until January 1999, the version of the essay posted
> on the FSF site said the following:
> >People who write improvements in free software often work for companies or
> >universities that would do almost anything to get money. A programmer may
> >want to contribute her changes to the community, but her employer may 'see
> >green' and insist on turning the changes into a commercial product.
> >When we explain to the employer that it is illegal to distribute the
> >improved version except as free software, the employer usually decides to
> >release it as free software rather than throw it away.
> In short, Stallman urges programmers to sabotage their employers' IP --
> by injecting GPLed code into it -- so that it must be given away.
No that is completely untrue. It is clear to me from reading this passage
that Stallman is talking about modifications to code already GPLed. He is
*not* referring to putting GPLed code into proprietary products.
*** N.B. PLEASE DO NOT CC ME ON REPLIES
More information about the wine-devel