[Asterisk-biz] Asterisk Ffork - OpenPBX.org

[Paul]

Dinesh Nair wrote:

>
>
> On 10/09/05 04:07 Jeremy McNamara said the following:
>
>> It very clearly states in the README in the Asterisk source TLD:
>>
>>  Specific permission is also granted to OpenSSL and OpenH323 to link 
>> with Asterisk.
>>
>>
>> LINK WITH ASTERISK - A fork is not asterisk.
>
>
> i'm failing to understand this. person A downloads asterisk from 
> www.asterisk.org, links in open{ssl,h323} and this is ok.
>
> person B downloads asterisk from www.asterisk.org, modifies some GPLed 
> asterisk code, links in open{ssl,h323} and distributes sources to the 
> whole shebang (including the modifications) , and this is not ok ?
>
> i dont think this is the way the GPL and the linking waiver works, but 
> then IANAL either.
>
You raised the same question I did in another post.

The fallacy being promoted here is that "A fork is not asterisk"

A fork is asterisk with modifications. If I change one character of the 
source I have the equivalent of a fork as far as licensing and legal 
issues are concerned. If I start a community project based on my 
one-character change it is called a fork.

I am running 3 types of asterisk on test sytems. I have it locally 
compiled. I have it installed from official debian packages. I have it 
installed from xorcom.com debian packages. All 3 are modifications to 
"Official Asterisk". So I really have 3 forks of asterisk running on my 
systems.

Anyway, GPL does not grant perpetual dictatorship. The Digium folks know 
that. You notice they are not threatening anyone here.