I agree! Not because I like what you're doing. It's of NO use to me:P
The author of the article should just take the source and add his diffs if he wants. Thats one of the uses of GPL. If the master doesn't want to add your diff. 1.make it available or 2.split development.
not such a big problem.
"WHOA! I just saw a Windows 2000 system that was still running BOHTTPD even after Netscape had been apparently terminated. Even the "Task Manager" showed no trace."
Thats very interesting.
I don't think that this will happen. If they would be charging a fee for this GPL-violating software, they could hardly be anonymous.. At least I hope no one will ever invent an ifrastructure for paying people anonymously.
I've only skimmed over the GPL once and yet even so I could see plenty of ways to make money. Yes the obvious one is support. But, lets say you write a program based on GPL code that is GPL'd itself.. lets say a game.. but this game can have *content* that isn't GPL'd. for example. You could distribute the game itself for free, but charge for extra levels, adventures, characters, expansion packs, use of your hardware (servers, services) etc. Jesus man, have some immagination:P
well, I think that it may be a good idea to allow users to play with the flags in packages. However this would have to be done in a way that also simplifies the procedure no? Why even get an RPM at all if you need to go read all the readmes and mess with the flags the same way you would do with a tarball?
qu3?
Slashdot Mirror
And come out with Ghz plastic underpants.
I agree! Not because I like what you're doing. It's of NO use to me :P
The author of the article should just take the source and add his diffs if he wants. Thats one of the uses of GPL. If the master doesn't want to add your diff. 1.make it available or 2.split development.
not such a big problem.
I is a one-armed man with mad itchin' on the wrong side of my back.
"WHOA! I just saw a Windows 2000 system that was still running BOHTTPD even after Netscape had been apparently terminated. Even the "Task Manager" showed no trace." Thats very interesting.
I don't think that this will happen. If they would be charging a fee for this GPL-violating software, they could hardly be anonymous.. At least I hope no one will ever invent an ifrastructure for paying people anonymously.
I've only skimmed over the GPL once and yet even so I could see plenty of ways to make money. Yes the obvious one is support. But, lets say you write a program based on GPL code that is GPL'd itself.. lets say a game.. but this game can have *content* that isn't GPL'd. for example. You could distribute the game itself for free, but charge for extra levels, adventures, characters, expansion packs, use of your hardware (servers, services) etc. Jesus man, have some immagination :P
well, I think that it may be a good idea to allow users to play with the flags in packages. However this would have to be done in a way that also simplifies the procedure no? Why even get an RPM at all if you need to go read all the readmes and mess with the flags the same way you would do with a tarball? qu3?