I think the confusion between "contracts" and "licenses", specifically the GPL, is the problem here. Linux's success and popularity wasn't possible without the GPL, which in turn was created by GNU which is a legal entity.
Personally I have no idea what Luke-Jr is talking about either, I just suspect that he's confusing licenses with contracts.
--- Jonathan Hutchins [email protected] wrote:
On Friday 25 April 2008 17:24:54 Luke -Jr wrote:
Keep in mind that ASUS is bound by contracts with
the Linux...
Once again, you show a stunning lack of basic legal understanding.
No-one has contracts with Linux. Linux is not a legal entity with whom/which you can make a contract.
____________________________________________________________________________________ Be a better friend, newshound, and know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile. Try it now. http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ