2 ms·
The article's position is in the opposite way. Charging extra for the right to use the software under a non-free license.
by statictype 17y ago
The article's position is in the opposite way. Charging extra for the right to use the software under a non-free license.
- lutorm 17y agoI just meant that the point of the article rests on the fact that the copyright holders can change the distribution terms whichever way they want. The "other" licenses won't be GPL, of course, but there's nothing preventing them from releasing under two licenses.