Viral license: Difference between revisions
(reversing the meaning. period.) |
(minor formatting) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
See [[GPL]] and other [[free software]] [[license]]s to understand the details of what is meant by a '''viral license'''. Usually this term ''''does not'''' imply [[required reintegration]], which is the controversial requirement that [[open source]] objects to in both free software and [[Consortium license]] software. | See [[GPL]] and other [[free software]] [[license]]s to understand the details of what is meant by a '''viral license'''. Usually this term '''''does not''''' imply [[required reintegration]], which is the controversial requirement that [[open source]] objects to in both free software and [[Consortium license]] software. | ||
[[Microsoft]] videly uses the term '''viral''' to portray both free software and consortia as being like [[computer virus]] creators, it is almost always better not use this term. | [[Microsoft]] videly uses the term '''viral''' to portray both free software and consortia as being like [[computer virus]] creators, it is almost always better not use this term. | ||
Revision as of 20:51, 24 November 2003
See GPL and other free software licenses to understand the details of what is meant by a viral license. Usually this term does not imply required reintegration, which is the controversial requirement that open source objects to in both free software and Consortium license software.
Microsoft videly uses the term viral to portray both free software and consortia as being like computer virus creators, it is almost always better not use this term.