Re: [PLUG] Plug talk on OS licenses?

[Tobias DiPasquale <toby@cbcg.net>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Feb 17, 2005, at 2:54 PM, Paul L. Snyder wrote:
> Some authoritative analysis of deeper topics would be more useful.  A 
> few
> things I'm curious about:
>
>  * How far can "internal use" of GPL-derivative works extend before you
>    have to release your modified code?
>
>  * When is a proprietary kernel module okay, and when is it in 
> violation
>    of the GPL?
>
>  * If you have a dual-licensed product (i.e., Qt) is it really okay to
>    integrate bugfixes contributed against the GPL version into the
>    commercial version?
>
>  * How far can Sun's "Open" licenses be trusted?  What are the details?
>
>  * What are the ramifications of the current flap about software 
> patents?
>    What are the risks to developers who release Open Source code?

Thus my earlier comment: these are the kind of questions that can only 
be truly answered by an IP lawyer. If Warwick is not one, his comments 
would be tantamount to uselessness in response to these questions 
(unless of course his comments were "ask a lawyer").

- --
Tobias DiPasquale
7A79 308C 0354 EA9C 7807  ED83 03C9 9E01 148E 7D01
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFCFPjCA8meARSOfQERAsjAAJ90wk/Qqw3TMtxPb4m3D7cAiXQFNQCeL+29
QWU3MLlUo8VO5vxG91QHqDo=
=kMfp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

___________________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group         --        http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  --   http://lists.phillylinux.org/mailman/listinfo/plug