Re: Misunderstanding GPL's terms and conditions as restrictions

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Jul 29, 2008, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> No, RSAREF couldn't have been modified.  It had restricted
> distribution and everyone had to get their own copy.

http://groups.google.com/group/gnu.misc.discuss/browse_thread/thread/ecc4d4ff360019e/b3dbb6f89144b706?lnk=st&q=gnu.misc.discuss+ripem#b3dbb6f89144b706

http://www.nic.funet.fi/index/crypt/cryptography/rpem/ripem/
http://www.nic.funet.fi/index/crypt/cryptography/rpem/ripem/README
http://www.nic.funet.fi/index/crypt/cryptography/rpem/ripem/rsaref/


There is indeed a lot of conflicting information out there, and the
files above are older than the discussion, but the point stands that
some piece of software could only be distributed under the GPL, and by
people who had accepted a patent license that prevented them from
doing just that, regardless of any copyright license
incompatibilities.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva         http://www.lsd.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
FSFLA Board Member       ¡Sé Libre! => http://www.fsfla.org/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}

-- 
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux