[GRASS5] libgrass license?

[Bernhard Reiter]

On Wed, Dec 03, 2003 at 11:30:50AM +0100, Radim Blazek wrote:
> On Wednesday 03 December 2003 01:51, Frank Warmerdam wrote:

> > That said, the GPL nature of the GRASS 5 code base, and the licensing
> > complications that implies are part of why I haven't spent much time
> > updating libgrass and libgrass support in GDAL.

> Yes, I think that you had violated the license and so you have lost 
> the rights to use GRASS 5. 

Why do you think he had violated it precisely?

> We use GPL, because it attracts users 
> and developers to use GRASS and to contribute to GRASS project ;-)

Your are retreating to sarcsam, 
because your arguments were refuted
and you didn't have a better solution for the complicated problem.

The GNU GPL protects the freedom of GRASS much better
than any other license and also has the consequence that the problematic 
situations are pointed out so that we need to resolve them.

> I don't think that any GRASS developer has will and sources to sue you.

And that also isn't the point.
The long term implications are that legal time bombs are set up,
not for Frank, but for other commcerial users like distribution
we don't know about.

> Maybe Bernhard and FSF? What do you think Bernhard, could we ask FSF to help
> us to solve Frank's GRASS license infringement?

There is not much to say about your attempt to personally offend me
and the FSF. It demonstrates that you only got a half picture and
are not proposing anything that is constructive.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-dev/attachments/20031203/85877798/attachment.bin