>>>>> Bob Kline <bkline at rksystems.com> (BK) writes: BK> No. The courts have already said otherwise. Emphatically. Repeatedly. BK> Eloquently. If the GPL says that you are entitled to a legitimate BK> copyright in a derivation which consists of the alteration of a single BK> letter of a work in the public domain then it is wrong. It doesn't say that. -- Piet van Oostrum <piet at cs.uu.nl> URL: http://www.cs.uu.nl/~piet [PGP] Private email: P.van.Oostrum at hccnet.nl
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4