🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <MWM.90Oct2145651@raven.pa.dec.com> mwm@raven.pa.dec.com (Mike (My Watch Has Windows) Meyer) writes:
>Just out of curiosity, when did AT&T start allowing people to freely
>redistribute their code if it's part of a derived work? At least,
>you're implying that I'm free to do what I want with my code if it
>includes AT&T's code, which generally includes redistribution.

They didn't, as far as I know.

The difference is that AT&T isn't claiming that their method is the best way to
make code useful to humanity (a claim made at the end of the GPV). AT&T isn't
calling themselves the Free anything. You don't expect to be able to reuse AT&T
code. In short, I'm implying nothing of the sort. AT&T is entirely up front
about it. The FSF is saying, "Reuse code! Pass it around! Improve on it! ..Oh,
by the way, we can control what you do with it if you do." Sneaky, despicable,
and underhanded.
-- 
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmaynard@thesis1.hsch.utexas.edu  | adequately be explained by stupidity.
"It's a hardware bug!" "It's a    +---------------------------------------
software bug!" "It's two...two...two bugs in one!" - _Engineer's Rap_