Re: dual licensing

Hi

On Sunday 22 February 2004 20:14, Gabucino wrote:
> Michael Niedermayer wrote:
> > > No, I mean QuickView, but there were/are probably a lot more cases like
> > > that.
> >
> > do u have any proof/evidence/...? or are u trying SCOs business model?
>
> What do you want from me? Ask Fabrice instead. He's silent, and QV is still
> unchanged and contains violating licenses.
u said theres a dual license, so i ask u for a proof, so i can use that proof 
to do something against it, but if u have no proof i cant do anything, and 
asking fabrice is pointless he wont tell me that there is a illegal license 
if theres one, which i seriously doubt
and about the license violation, yes qv did violate the fineprint of the LGPL 
(not providing object files for relinking IIRC) and i & fabrice ignored it, 
ignoring it is not illegal or morally wrong or is it?

-- 
Michael
level[i]= get_vlc(); i+=get_vlc();		(violates patent EP0266049)
median(mv[y-1][x], mv[y][x-1], mv[y+1][x+1]);	(violates patent #5,905,535)
buf[i]= qp - buf[i-1];				(violates patent #?)
for more examples, see http://mplayerhq.hu/~michael/patent.html
stop it, see http://petition.eurolinux.org & http://petition.ffii.org/eubsa/en