GPL and LGPL not acceptable for Fedora!

[Tomas Janousek]

Hello,

On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 10:25:01AM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
> Tomas Janousek <tjanouse at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> > If COPYING does not signal licensing intent, why "any version of the
> > GPL", why not "unknown license, if any" ?
> 
> An unmodified COPYING file from FSF contains:
> 
> "If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation."

Yes, of course, but does The Law say that anybody should actually look at the
contents of the COPYING file and assume that the program is licensed in terms
of that license, even if not mentiened anywhere?

What I'm trying to say is that if The Program does not mention what license it
is being licensed in *at all*, does it really mean it's GPL?

-- 
TJ. (Brno, CZ), BaseOS, Red Hat