Wired Article on the GPL
mark at klomp.org
Thu Mar 30 07:02:30 UTC 2000
On Wed, Mar 29, 2000 at 08:11:01PM -0800, David Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Mar 2000, Aaron Turner wrote:
> > Wired has a rather interesting article on the GPL in relation to the suit
> > by Mattel re: cphack. I was wondering what people thought of the merrits
> > of the statements, and specifically what I as a developer need to do to
> > protect my works from such loopholes.
> According to one of the authors of the suite, the GPL is not even
> involved. Apparently, one of the files had a single line that said
> "this stuff under the GPL" or something like that as equally short,
> that was not in any of the other files. He was unaware that it was even
> there until he read the Wired article the same time everyone else did.
This is true. Only one file (Unit1.pas) has one line saying:
"CPHack v0.1.0 by Eddy L O Jansson / Released under the GPL."
But the main document (the actual essay cp4break.html) says:
"The source is included, and you can do whatever you want with it."
"You are allowed to mirror this document and the related files anywhere you
For more information see the home page of Matthew Skala.
Or one of the mirrors of the original paper.
More information about the License-discuss