discuss: licensing issue
Subject:
Re: licensing issue
From:
Poet/Joshua Drake ####@####.####
Date:
4 Dec 2001 18:04:36 -0000
Message-Id: <Pine.LNX.4.30.0112041103500.22978-100000@commandprompt.com>
>I was very surprised to find that they were including nonfree
>documents in the main tree, which is a clear violation of the DFSG,
>so I let him know they were in violation.
>
>I realized then and now that this would be a problem for the LDP. I
>thought about it long and hard and decided I had no other choice. Once
>the situation came to my attention I couldn't just ignore it and
>pretend I didn't know. That would have been deceptive and unethical in
>my judgement.
It was the right thing to do.
J
--
--
<COMPANY>CommandPrompt - http://www.commandprompt.com </COMPANY>
<PROJECT>OpenDocs, LLC. - http://www.opendocs.org </PROJECT>
<PROJECT>LinuxPorts - http://www.linuxports.com </PROJECT>
<WEBMASTER>LDP - http://www.linuxdoc.org </WEBMASTER>
--
Instead of asking why a piece of software is using "1970s technology,"
start asking why software is ignoring 30 years of accumulated wisdom.
--
