xyz123xyz

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by xyz123xyz 10y ago

   Here the discussion gets a little more heated as the crowd keeps simply repeating themselves and ignoring all legal arguments. -------------------------- >>54844263 >Which was not broken since the sub-licensee still has all the pri
2. 2.▲
   by xyz123xyz 10y ago

   Additionally: ----------------- >54843968 The GPLv2 is a text that outlines by what ways a licensee may use a copyrighted work provided by the licensor. In the case that the agreement is not followed standard copyright law applies (all r
3. 3.▲
   by xyz123xyz 10y ago

   >How exactly are they doing this without either violating the GPL or failing to keep their patches secret? Here are some additional arguments by lay people defending GRSecurity and rebuttals based in an understanding of the law (which a
4. 4.▲
   by xyz123xyz 10y ago

   >How exactly are they doing this without either violating the GPL or failing to keep their patches secret? Some more excerpts: --------------------------------- >>54842691 >Are they not redistributing the source? Correct > A
5. 5.▲
   by xyz123xyz 10y ago

   >How exactly are they doing this without either violating the GPL or failing to keep their patches secret? Because ignorance (of the law) is bliss. Here are some discussions on this topic and some excerps: http://boards.4chan.