From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Carsten Dominik Subject: Re: license item Date: Fri, 26 Jun 2009 16:01:05 +0200 Message-ID: References: <4A4475DD.2070407@online.de> <878wjfyz0e.fsf@kassiopeya.MSHEIMNETZ> <4A44D444.9040809@manor-farm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MKBzS-0002tT-HL for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:01:18 -0400 Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1MKBzN-0002rF-2N for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:01:17 -0400 Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=60917 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1MKBzM-0002r8-VM for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:01:13 -0400 Received: from mail-ew0-f208.google.com ([209.85.219.208]:50971) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1MKBzM-0007Dh-7g for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 10:01:12 -0400 Received: by ewy4 with SMTP id 4so928846ewy.42 for ; Fri, 26 Jun 2009 07:01:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4A44D444.9040809@manor-farm.org> List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: lists@manor-farm.org Cc: emacs-orgmode Mailinglist On Jun 26, 2009, at 3:59 PM, Ian Barton wrote: > Sebastian Rose wrote: >> Isn't it so, that no license means "All Rights Reserved"? >> Not sure, bu I think in Germany it is... >> Anyway, if you receive Org-mode with emacs, it has just the same >> license >> as emacs. > I see Carsten has added a link to the GPL. However, I think it's > worthwhile specifically saying which *version* of the GPL. > > This might seem a trivial matter. However, I am involved with > another project where the maintainer moved the licence from GPL V2 > to GPL V3, with the best of intentions. A large commercial company > wanted to contribute considerable resources to the project, but they > were unhappy with the V3 licence and wanted to continue with V2. As > a result considerable effort was wasted in getting everyone who had > contributed patches to the V3 version agreeing to them being > "backported" to the V2 licence. Interesting. Being part of Emacs amost forces us to use 3. - Carsten