[phpws-comm-commits] modules/article/docs LICENSE.txt,1.2,1.3

SourceForge Headquarters 1320 Columbia Street Suite 310 San Diego, CA 92101 +1 (858) 422-6466

Update of /cvsroot/phpwebsite-comm/modules/article/docs
In directory sc8-pr-cvs1:/tmp/cvs-serv5540/docs

Modified Files:
	LICENSE.txt 
Log Message:
New version release and minor license adjustment

Index: LICENSE.txt
===================================================================
RCS file: /cvsroot/phpwebsite-comm/modules/article/docs/LICENSE.txt,v
retrieving revision 1.2
retrieving revision 1.3
diff -C2 -d -r1.2 -r1.3
*** LICENSE.txt	14 Jul 2003 20:43:02 -0000	1.2
--- LICENSE.txt	16 Jul 2003 19:47:47 -0000	1.3
***************
*** 7,13 ****
  Now that I've told you where to look, you can't stop staring at it, can you?

! This copyright must always display so that it can perform its function.  Since this module is released under the LGPL, you can change the code if you want, but this copyright must still display in the same manner.  If you want to change or remove the copyright string, contact me and I will sell you a copy of this module under a different license.

! These terms are covered in the license, but I understand that some folks choose to interpret the passage differently.  For those people, let me make this clearer.  Everything I just said is part of and supercedes the rest of the license terms specifed below.  I'm not a lawyer, so if you feel that this invalidates the GNU license, then consider the above terms as superceding the entire license.

--- 7,13 ----
  Now that I've told you where to look, you can't stop staring at it, can you?

! This mark must always display so that it can perform its function.  Since this module is released under the LGPL, you can change the code if you want, but this mark must still display in the same manner.  If you want to change or remove the identification string, contact me and I will sell you a copy of this module under a different license.

! These terms are covered in the license, but I understand that some folks choose to interpret the passage differently.  For those people, let me make this clearer.  Everything I just said is part of and supercedes the rest of the license terms specifed below.  I'm not a lawyer, so if you feel that this invalidates the GNU license, then consider the above terms as constituting the entire license.