I understand and apparently you do too as your examples show. For all I know, everyone involved understands. But there was an *implication* made by one or more people in this thread that the GPL somehow forbade people from *selling* software which simply is not accurate. On Wed, 2003-08-13 at 19:14, Jim Mercer wrote: > On Wed, Aug 13, 2003 at 06:30:58PM -0500, Marc Williams wrote: > > I disagree. I don't think there is any "right" time or place to correct > > GPL misinterpretations. And furthermore, the GPL allows the sale of > > "product", not just know-how. You simply have to include source code > > and a copy of the GPL with your product. > > i think the issue here is that someone is (potentially) selling a > new/improved gnugk, without making the source of the improvements available > publicly. > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by: Free pre-built ASP.NET sites including Data Reports, E-commerce, Portals, and Forums are available now. Download today and enter to win an XBOX or Visual Studio .NET. http://aspnet.click-url.com/go/psa00100003ave/direct;at.aspnet_072303_01/01 _______________________________________________ List: Openh323gk-users@lists.sourceforge.net Archive: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?forum_id=8549 Homepage: http://www.gnugk.org/
