On Wed, 2004-08-25 at 21:48, wayne wrote:
[snip]
It isn't at all clear to me that a patch can be a "Licensed Product"
and thus allowing the person applying the patch to the qmail
source to be covered by the "End User" aspects of the SenderID
license. Even if a patch could be a product, aren't you
creating a new product when you apply the patch?
This follows right along with my explanation that, at least with the
GPL, there is no distinction between end user and intermediate developer
(see http://www.imc.org/ietf-mxcomp/mail-archive/msg03589.html). I
think that any license that makes this distinction will be a problem for
the GPL and possibly lots of other FOSS licenses. And even some
non-FOSS license (by FSF, OSI, or DFSG definitions), like the qmail
license.
--
-Paul Iadonisi
Senior System Administrator
Red Hat Certified Engineer / Local Linux Lobbyist
Ever see a penguin fly? -- Try Linux.
GPL all the way: Sell services, don't lease secrets