On Wed, 07 November 2001, "Michael Beck" wrote:

> > From: cds@cs.hmc.edu [mailto:cds@cs.hmc.edu]
> 
> > For the concrete example of Microsoft using parts of Linux, they would
> > legally have to release the source of Windows under the GPL.
> 
> I know, that's why I've said 
> "assuming for a second that it's legally possible",
> meaning that they could just use it the way Greg suggested in his email, i.e.
> using open source code in a proprietary software without releasing the
> proprietary part.

the open-source author could license his work under 
whatever license it would take to allow the scenario
to be possible. 

But the scenario is still irrelevant, because your focus
is on who BENEFITS from the open source, not whether or
not the open-source author is HARMED.

the work of the open source author is not HARMED
by -anyone- BENEFITTING from his/her work.

see last post.
Greg




--
license-discuss archive is at http://crynwr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?3

