On 09/23/10 15:16, Tor Lillqvist wrote: > As long as it seems clear that none of the actually affected parties > (i.e. the people who hold the copyright to parts of GIMP and other > (L)GPL-licensed bits bundled by the "scammers") care about the alleged > problem or would consider doing anything, this discussion is mostly > pointless. > > --tml > _______________________________________________ > Gimp-developer mailing list > Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer > If that were the case GPL is pointless and adding a copyright message to the source is pointless. Openly suggesting that nobody gives a damn nor would consider doing anything makes it doubly pointless. Presumably those choosing to work under GPL don't think it's pointless. The person in question is probably doing more to promote the project than harm it , though it seems they are not complying with the licence and hence are likely selling counterfeit software on e-bay. Since there seem to be some curiously misinformed opinions about what GPL does allow , even by those quoting bits of it, the discussion may not be futile. It's probably not conducive to the OSS as a whole to promote the idea no-one is prepared to enforce it. That's not the case. /gg _______________________________________________ Gimp-developer mailing list Gimp-developer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.XCF.Berkeley.EDU/mailman/listinfo/gimp-developer
