On Wed, 26 Dec 2018, David McGough wrote:
So, what happens if a supposed copyright owner shows up 10 years from now and says: "That code or function (or whatever) was never GPL2 and should never have been released!" ---and they have reasonable proof?
I'm not sure I understand the argument. Are you saying that it is not appropriate to share the source, because you are not sure that the it is covered under the GPL? In that case, are you not opening yourself to greater liability by continuing to modify and use it, if you are not sure whether it is covered by the GPL or not. The whole point of the GPL is that once the code is released under the GPL that there is an explicit grant to EVERYBODY to do with the code as they see fit, the only restriction being that you must continue to share the source. It seems to me that if you comply with the GPL, you have a reasonable argument that you acted in good faith and you can claim innocent infingement, regardless of who the original copyright holder is. If on the other hand it is true that the GPL does not apply, you are quite right to worry about modifying and redistributing the code. I apologize if I misundertood your argument, but I am not following. -Willem ================================================================ Dr. Willem A. Schreuder, President, Principia Mathematica Address: 445 Union Blvd, Suite 230, Lakewood, CO 80228, USA Tel: (303) 716-3573 Fax: (303) 716-3575 WWW: www.prinmath.com Email: Willem.Schreuder@prinmath.com