On Thu, 16 Aug 2007 09:22:30 -0400 Simo Sorce <ssorce redhat com> wrote: > I think this is wrong, I am sorry I didn't catch it before, but if > COPYING is not just a mere copy of the GPL license as published by the > FSF, but it is actually an obviously edited file which express the > intention of the Author, it do matter by all means, and it express the > license you should use. > Of course conflicts with the license in single source files have to be > resolved, but if source files lack any mention of the license version > they are under, what matter is what's in COPYING. IMO IANAL But what if the file isn't modified, and is obviously a verbatim copy from the webpage? -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours?
Description: PGP signature