From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 3539 invoked by alias); 18 Aug 2006 14:26:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 3511 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Aug 2006 14:26:54 -0000 X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from main.gmane.org (HELO ciao.gmane.org) (80.91.229.2) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.31) with ESMTP; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:26:52 +0000 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.43) id 1GE5It-0004hB-Lg for cygwin-talk@cygwin.com; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 16:26:36 +0200 Received: from 65.207.213.226 ([65.207.213.226]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 16:26:31 +0200 Received: from mwoehlke by 65.207.213.226 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 18 Aug 2006 16:26:31 +0200 To: cygwin-talk@cygwin.com From: mwoehlke Subject: Re: Rsync over ssh (pulling from Cygwin to Linux) stalls.. Date: Fri, 18 Aug 2006 14:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: References: <4C89134832705D4D85A6CD2EBF38AE0F683A64@PAUMAILU03.ags.agere.com> <00ea01c6c2d0$f6e18a00$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.8.0.5) Gecko/20060719 Thunderbird/1.5.0.5 Mnenhy/0.7.4.0 In-Reply-To: <00ea01c6c2d0$f6e18a00$a501a8c0@CAM.ARTIMI.COM> X-IsSubscribed: yes Mailing-List: contact cygwin-talk-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-talk-owner@cygwin.com Reply-To: The Cygwin-Talk Maiming List X-SW-Source: 2006-q3/txt/msg00254.txt.bz2 Dave Korn wrote: > On 18 August 2006 14:31, Williams, Gerald S (Jerry) wrote: > >> Can anyone from RedHat acknowledge that this arrangement >> would be acceptable to them? If so, that would potentially >> open the door to any public domain code. > > I don't suppose for one second that the RedHat legal team are actually > reading this newgroup. > > *sip* > > :-) Yeeeeeaah, that was my thought :-) To answer the question, though, that's the whole point of making a trivial change. My understanding is you can copyright that trivial change, which then covers the entire work, with the exception that the original PD version is still PD. It's a farce, really, but should comply with the letter of the law. :-) Hmm, is there a list legalredhatcom? ;-) -- Matthew KATE: Awesome Text Editor