[GRASS5] license question

[Glynn Clements]

Bernhard Reiter wrote:

> It is about the legal maintainability of a Software.
> You are making the same mistake as the linux people:
> They were not watching their legal status and got that SCO case 
> as one of the results of this.

I don't think that particular statement is true; I think that they
would have gotten the SCO case anyway. SCO's arguments seem to be:

1. That they own some of the stuff which IBM contributed.
2. They automatically own anything and everything related to Unix.

I don't think that anything which the Linux developers could have done
(e.g. FSF-style copyright assignments) would have changed anything in
that particular case.

-- 
Glynn Clements <glynn.clements at virgin.net>