GPL v2+, GPL v2, GPL v3, LGPL v2, LGPL v2+ ?

[Thomas Zander]

On Wednesday 6 September 2006 10:46, Cyrille Berger wrote:
> I forgot, you are aware that with GPLv3, krita is illegal in the US ? I
> can't count the number of patents we are violating.

Cyrille, really, I have spent a fulltime week reading all about the GPLv3, 
talking to PJ from Groklaw and I have some ideas about the GPLv3 
afterwards, naturally. (but thats off-topic for this thread)

My point is that this and the parent email have absolutely no base in 
reality and I am 100% sure that your interpretation and certainly the 
above statement will not be supported by people that know the law better 
than you or I do.

Please spent a lot more time reading the GPLv3 conversations and please do 
ask the FSF about very hurting things like your statement above.
I would very much like to see these misconceptions clarified.

As for you being discuraged to work on Image or UI. Well, the code is GPL 
and its not going to change. If the license doesn't please you, you don't 
use the code. Its that simple.
-- 
Thomas Zander
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kimageshop/attachments/20060906/41de4801/attachment.pgp