Re: Re: GPL/LGPL

Hi,

Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
> Regardless of whether your modified sources are considered simple
> aggregation (which they cannot), your fundamental gpl-violation is that
> you did not include a copy of the license per Section 1 of the GPL.
> Thus your distribution is in violation of the GPL, and your attempt to
> distribute the files without a copy of the license means that, for you,
> the license is void and terminates.  Anyone else that has redistributed
> LiS-2.18.0 from your site without including the license, such as Steve,
> is also in fundamental violation of the GPL and the license to these
> files was void and terminated.  As we follow a dual-licensing model,
> punitive damages may have resulted from these gpl violations.  For more
> information, see http://www.gpl-violations.org/

I am the owner of the copyrights in the contributions I have done to
LiS. Some of these contributions are released under the GPL, and some
are released under the LGPL.

I have never given you permission to relicense or redistribute these
works under any other license terms than the GPL respective the LGPL.

Therefore, I would like you to explain your remark above about dual-
licensing this code. I really hope I am misunderstanding something.

>>   At 04:48 PM 8/30/2006, Brian F. G. Bidulock wrote:
>>
>>     Dave,
[snip]
>>     ./include/sys/tihdr.h
>>     ./include/sys/timod.h
[snip]
>>     Your license to copy and distribute these files is revoked.  Please
>>     remove them from your website.

I wrote the two files not snipped from the list above last millenium,
and contributed them to LiS under the LGPL license. Please explain your
right to prohibit others from redistributing them under the LGPL license.

Best Regards,

Ole Husgaard.