Subject: Re: Interesting "almost open source" Microsoft tactic
From: "La Monte H.P. Yarroll" <piggy@timesys.com>
Date: Fri, 12 Mar 2004 13:45:51 -0500

Benjamin J. Tilly wrote:

>ken_i_m@elegantinnovations.net wrote:
>  
>
>>On Mon, Mar 01, 2004 at 11:59:34AM -0500, La Monte H.P. Yarroll (piggy@timesys.com)
wrote:
>>    
>>
>>>Its very clear that they are attempting to be GPL compatable.
>>>      
>>>

I just reread my own comment.  What a typo!

It is very clear that they are attempting to be GPL INcompatable.

>>>The inability to sublicense just confuses me.  It isn't as if there is a 
>>>license registration procedure.
>>>      
>>>
>> 
>>IMNAL but I believe that this "inability to sublicense" precludes 
>>this "GPL compatable".
>>    
>>
>
>IANAL either, but Eben Moglen is.
>
>http://www.newsforge.com/software/04/02/26/1448253.shtml shows his
>response both after seeing a small part of the license out of context
>and then after seeing the full license.
>
>He doesn't offer a definitive answer, but he indicates that it
>probably is GPL incompatible.
>
>Cheers,
>Ben
>
>  
>

-- 
  Anyone who quotes me in their sig is an idiot. -- Rusty Russell's sig