<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/8/05, <b class="gmail_sendername">Tony Hoyle</b> <<a href="mailto:tmh@nodomain.org">tmh@nodomain.org</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
snacktime wrote:<br><br>><br>> Being that Digium wants to be able to sell a commercial version, I don't<br>> see how they could have been more accomodating then this. Digium can<br>><br>They could just use the GPL as is, since they chose the license in the
<br>first place.. they clearly have no issues with it.<br><br>They already have the rights to use the code granted by the GPL - that's<br>not what the disclaimer is for.<br><br>The disclaimer gives them the same rights as the owner so they can
<br>relicense the contributed code under a non-GPL license for commercial<br>reasons. Not everyone is happy with that, clearly.</blockquote><div><br>
I understand, that's why I said 'Being that Digium wants to be able to sell a commercial version'.<br>
</div><br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">TBH I'd rather digium had chosen something like BSD to start with and<br>avoided all the GPL politics but the situation we have is the one we have.
</blockquote><div><br>
Agreed.<br>
</div></div><br>