[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-artists
Subject:    Re: [kde-artists] Crystal Clear release!
From:       Rainer Endres <endres () physos ! org>
Date:       2005-06-23 13:28:43
Message-ID: 200506231528.43578.endres () physos ! org
[Download RAW message or body]


Hi

On Thursday 23 June 2005 14:40, Luke-Jr wrote:
> It is perfectly possible to license a work under the GPL or LGPL, but not
> publish the source yourself. In doing so, anyone who wishes to redistribute
> under those licenses would be required to obtain (legitimately) the source
> to distribute with the work. This could be either directly from the author
> or from someone else who has obtained the sources legitimately and has the
> license to redistribute them (which they would, under both GPL and LGPL)

So, you say the GPL allows to distribute closed source (I am no giving away 
the source) binaries? Reading the text, I can not see where this is 
explicitly denied.

So MS can license Office under the (L)GPL, as long as they do not give anybody 
the Source Code, nobody is allowed to redistribute the work?

Trying to understand this.

	Rainer
______________________________________________________________________________
kde-artists@mail.kde.org |  https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-artists
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]