---- START NEW MESSAGE --- Received: from cherry.ease.lsoft.com [209.119.0.109] by dpmail10.doteasy.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.05) id A19BCDB020A; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 09:30:03 -0800 Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <13.00CC11B1@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:29:50 -0500 Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 3959 for PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:29:34 -0500 Received: from MITVMA (NJE origin SMTP@MITVMA) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LMail V1.2d/1.8d) with BSMTP id 8894; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:29:17 -0500 Received: from mail.bteknet.net [65.121.34.69] by mitvma.mit.edu (IBM VM SMTP Level 430) via TCP with ESMTP ; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 12:29:15 EST X-Warning: mitvma.mit.edu: Host mail.bteknet.net claimed to be bixbyenergy.com Received: from Oelke.com [65.167.232.194] by bixbyenergy.com with ESMTP (SMTPD32-8.05) id A16634E0262; Wed, 28 Jan 2004 10:29:10 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.0; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031205 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <7F3B5669-51B4-11D8-9E8E-000A95E5DF26@mac.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <4017F13F.6010209@Oelke.com> Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2004 11:28:31 -0600 Reply-To: pic microcontroller discussion list Sender: pic microcontroller discussion list From: Dan Oelke Subject: Re: [OT:] SCO lobbying Congress about Linux To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU In-Reply-To: <7F3B5669-51B4-11D8-9E8E-000A95E5DF26@mac.com> Precedence: list X-RCPT-TO: Status: U X-UIDL: 371856142 >>> As an interesting question, can the AUTHOR of code that was >>> released under GPL ever change the license terms? >> >> >> Of course they can. *They* are the copyright owner. >> >> > Ok, now what happens once several additional authors have > been added... If I make major changes to GPL'ed software, > do I get to add myself to the copyright notice as well? Or > does the original author end up owning the copyright to my > code? > > BillW Unless you explicitly assign your copyright to the original author you own copyright to your modifications and the original author owns his original work. This means that the original author can not re-release the code with your contributions under a different license without your permission. Dan -- http://www.piclist.com hint: The list server can filter out subtopics (like ads or off topics) for you. See http://www.piclist.com/#topics . Return-Path: <> Received: from mitvma.mit.edu ([18.92.0.3]) by tomts38-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.05 201-253-122-130-105-20030824) with ESMTP id <20040128015614.WYYB8311.tomts38-srv.bellnexxia.net@mitvma.mit.edu> for ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 20:56:14 -0500 Received: by mitvma.mit.edu (IBM VM SMTP Level 430) via spool with SMTP id 6142 ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 20:56:11 EST Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU (NJE origin LISTSERV@MITVMA) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LMail V1.2d/1.8d) with BSMTP id 3359; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 20:56:11 -0500 Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 20:56:11 -0500 From: "L-Soft list server at MITVMA.MIT.EDU (1.8e)" Subject: PICLIST: error report from YAHOO.COM To: listsjosh@3MTMP.COM, piclist_errors@SYMPATICO.CA Message-ID: X-LSV-ListID: None The enclosed message has been identified as a delivery error for the PICLIST list because it was sent to 'owner-piclist@MITVMA.MIT.EDU'. ------------------------------ Message in error ------------------------------- Received: from MITVMA (NJE origin SMTP@MITVMA) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LMail V1.2d/1.8d) with BSMTP id 3357; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 20:56:11 -0500 Received: from mta103.mail.scd.yahoo.com [66.218.86.19] by mitvma.mit.edu (IBM VM SMTP Level 430) via TCP with SMTP ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 20:56:10 EST X-Comment: mitvma.mit.edu: Mail was sent by mta103.mail.scd.yahoo.com From: MAILER-DAEMON@yahoo.com To: owner-piclist@mitvma.mit.edu X-Loop: MAILER-DAEMON@yahoo.com Subject: Delivery failure Message from yahoo.com. Unable to deliver message to the following address(es). : Sorry, your message to hbarregrd@yahoo.com cannot be delivered. This account is over quota. --- Original message follows. Return-Path: Received: from 209.119.0.109 (EHLO cherry.ease.lsoft.com) (209.119.0.109) by mta103.mail.scd.yahoo.com with SMTP; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:51:07 -0800 Received: from PEAR.EASE.LSOFT.COM (209.119.0.19) by cherry.ease.lsoft.com (LSMTP for Digital Unix v1.1b) with SMTP id <0.00CBF793@cherry.ease.lsoft.com>; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:49:25 -0500 Received: from MITVMA.MIT.EDU by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LISTSERV-TCP/IP release 1.8e) with spool id 9317 for PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:49:20 -0500 Received: from MITVMA (NJE origin SMTP@MITVMA) by MITVMA.MIT.EDU (LMail V1.2d/1.8d) with BSMTP id 9435; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:48:40 -0500 Received: from durango.natetech.com [216.17.150.117] by mitvma.mit.edu (IBM VM SMTP Level 430) via TCP with ESMTP ; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 12:48:39 EST X-Comment: mitvma.mit.edu: Mail was sent by durango.natetech.com Received: from [207.239.243.99] (helo=natetech.com) by durango.natetech.com with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1AlXKL-00050s-0z for PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU; Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:48:41 -0700 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6b) Gecko/20031207 Thunderbird/0.4 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <00551D65-5072-11D8-9E8E-000A95E5DF26@mac.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <4016A477.6030505@natetech.com> Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2004 10:48:39 -0700 Reply-To: pic microcontroller discussion list Sender: pic microcontroller discussion list From: Nate Duehr Organization: NateTech Subject: Re: [OT:] SCO lobbying Congress about Linux To: PICLIST@MITVMA.MIT.EDU In-Reply-To: <00551D65-5072-11D8-9E8E-000A95E5DF26@mac.com> Precedence: list William Chops Westfield wrote: > On Monday, Jan 26, 2004, at 09:19 US/Pacific, Peter L. Peres wrote: > >> What the proprietary software supporters are trying to do, is to make >> all >> roads toll roads, because theirs is a toll road, and because (so they >> claim) all roads resemble theirs in design > > > What proprietary SW supporter other than SCO is making claims along > these lines? Don't you DARE villify PS vendors because of SCO's > actions! i don't think even microsoft has been stupid enough to > make such a claim against Open source software (although I wouldn't > be surprised if they're clandestinly supporting SCO...) The propretary vendors make these statements by their actions. Microsoft, Apple, etc... all say "you have to pay to play" with their OS. And their Marketing departments (just doing their job) work hard to give the impression there is "no other way" to get the solutions needed from your computer hardware than to use their software. I think that's all Peter is saying, but I could be wrong. An example would be last year's announcement by Microsoft that what Unix folks call "symlinks" were "created by Microsoft for Windows XP". The idea of a symbolic link on a file system that redirects you to another file is not new, not by a long shot... but those that read and believe the Marketing hype *do* believe it. And when they believe, they follow with their money and purchase the software. Personally I have no problem with people paying for Microsoft products. It gives both my small consulting company (side business) and numerous employers I have worked for a competitive advantage -- I don't pay for operating systems, and I don't ever feel like I have to in order to do business. A number of small business owners have been very happy with the possibility that they'll "never pay for software again" when I've helped them through server rebuilds using Free Software. Yes -- they'll probably feel the need to pay me to return and look things over once in a while, or fix specific problems they are having, but even then -- they don't HAVE to... they can find anyone to do it. If someone else will charge them less money, they can hope that person will do as good a job as I did -- or if they hated the job I did (boy I hope not!) they can easily switch "vendors". And I'm always careful to examine the risks of using Free Software with them also -- the possibility (very real) that a particular piece of software will go through a huge transformation and become unusable for their business and the real-world examples of a "fork" -- where they'll have to (with my help) have to make an educated decision about which side of the tree to stay with. Most of them like the control it gives them over their own "fate", shall we say. Nate Duehr, nate@natetech.com -- http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic: [PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads *** MESSAGE TRUNCATED *** .. .