GPLv3|L8R -- The ico-files.
Mats Lidell writes:
As I get it there is not possible to store meta data in an
ico-file. So we can't insert a license in these files even if they are
GPLv2 or later.
The license applies whether or not there's a statement in the file,
simply because we distribute it as part of XEmacs. If you get a file
of unknown source without a permission statement, you are dealing with
potentially stolen goods. The point of putting permission statements
in each file is to (1) give people a basis for assessing such legal
risks if they receive a file split out from our distribution, and (2)
to inform our users of files with better :-) licenses than GPLv3+.
State the license in an other file or simply ignore it?
The license is stated in almost every file in the distribution; there
is no legal requirement for us to list individual files explicitly.
It is a convenience for our users, and for any copyright-holder who
wished to enforce their copyrights.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta