>Nor is there "GPL with a few things ignored".
Show me where the GPL says that you can prevent people from changing the
code to make it more useful to them. Show me where the GPL allows you to
build 'proprietary/unmodifiable' bits in to 'secure' your program against the
types of usage you don't like.
The GPL says, for example, " For example, if you distribute copies of such
a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the
rights that you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get
the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their
rights."
The GPL explicitly grants the right to modify in section 2. It says nothing
about not being allowed to remove 'security' or 'lockout' features. In fact,
it would be horrible if people could put any security or lockout features
into GPLed code.
The GPL says, "Each time you redistribute the Program (or any work based on
the Program), the recipient automatically receives a license from the
original licensor to copy, distribute or modify the Program subject to
these terms and conditions. You may not impose any further restrictions on
the recipients' exercise of the rights granted herein. You are not
responsible for enforcing compliance by third parties to this License."
What could be clearer? "It's GPL but you can't change it to do things the
original author specifically didn't want you to be able to do" is horseshit.
DS
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/