ioUrT licensing controversy (was Re: Greetings)

[Tim Angus]

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 16:08:41 -0600 (MDT) monk at rq3.com wrote:
> Ok, now THAT I understand.  I don't believe "aggregation" is the
> proper term for what y'all believe to be in violation.

I didn't actually bring aggregation up; I'm not sure who it was.
Suffice to say, I think ioUrT + UrT constitutes more than aggregation,
so from that point of view I don't think the term aggregation has much
relevance, no.

> You are contending that the UrT mod is a (heh) module combined with
> ioUrT into one program.

Correct.

> So even if someone gets the current version of ioq3 and their mod and
> puts them in one ZIP, without customizing ioq3, you're going to feel
> that it's in violation of the Q3 mod sdk license due to "intent".

Due to the fact my reading of the license prohibits it, as previously
discussed.

> But not necessarily in violation of the GPL.  Is that correct?

The GPL would be violated also due to the combination the licenses,
each of which are mutually exclusive.