On 01/09/07, David H. Lynch Jr. wrote:
That is entirely false.
If the file has a copyright on it, unless it is otherwise noticed, you
cannot simply do whatever you wish with the file.
The moment you remove the licence is the moment you make the code
nonfree (e.g. non-compatible with any free or open-source licence).
If instead of removing the licence you put your own licence under a
copyright statement of someone else, well, that simply constitutes
fraud -- it's no different than quietly changing the first page of a
legal document after the document is already signed and approved.
C.
| Ian Campbell | Re: [PATCH] x86: Construct 32 bit boot time page tables in native format. |
| Greg Kroah-Hartman | [PATCH 001/196] Chinese: Add the known_regression URI to the HOWTO |
| Justin Piszcz | Linux Software RAID 5 Performance Optimizations: 2.6.19.1: (211MB/s read & 195... |
| Alan | Re: [RFC] Heads up on sys_fallocate() |
| Matthias Scheler | Re: HEADS UP: timecounters (branch simonb-timecounters) merged into -current |
| David Laight | long usernames |
| Quentin Garnier | Re: Understanding foo_open, foo_read, etc. |
| Jared D. McNeill | Breaking binary compatibility for /dev/joy |
git: | |
| Jarek Poplawski | [PATCH] pkt_sched: Destroy gen estimators under rtnl_lock(). |
| Gerrit Renker | [PATCH 0/37] dccp: Feature negotiation - last call for comments |
| David Miller | [GIT]: Networking |
| Natalie Protasevich | [BUG] New Kernel Bugs |
