[IAEP] GPL non compliance? was Re: [Sugar-devel] GPL non-compliance, was Re: [SLOBS] GPLv3

Yamandu Ploskonka yamaplos at gmail.com
Sat Apr 23 14:49:08 EDT 2011

following Martin's timely advice, may I please try again, so we can 
finish this with simple answers?

the question is (or are)

   1. is locking users out in compliance with current GPL?
   2. does Ceibal lock out users?
   3. is there a known procedure to get keys for Ceibal users?
   4. is Ceibal in compliance with current GPL?
   5. if no, who should follow up? the FSF? the Sugarlabs Board?
   6. were of-record (2, 3) Ceibal policies to continue, would it be in
      compliance with GPL3?
   7. if no, who should follow up? the FSF? the Sugarlabs Board?

I know that 2 and 3 are almost rhetorical, but in the interest of not 
building other questions as "loaded", I add them there.  There even 
might be good news I am unaware of that someone who is better informed 
can offer!

Thank you


On 04/23/2011 01:16 PM, Martin Langhoff wrote:
> Folks --
> one thing we need to be in good intellectual shape to handle loaded
> questions. Everyone here probably knows them well, but I just re-read
>     http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question
> and it was rather refreshing and useful.
> In general, if you don't know much about a topic, it is a good idea to
> *avoid* making inflammatory statements and accusations.
> You can ask, but please don't mix the valid questions with accusations
> or loaded questions. It doesn't help anyone.
> cheers,
> m
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/iaep/attachments/20110423/83a75c11/attachment.html>

More information about the IAEP mailing list