<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title>Disqus - Latest Comments for shashanky</title><link>http://disqus.com/by/shashanky/</link><description></description><atom:link href="http://disqus.com/shashanky/comments.rss" rel="self"></atom:link><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 07:18:10 -0000</lastBuildDate><item><title>Re: Forced contribution  - till's blog</title><link>http://till.klampaeckel.de/blog/archives/50-Forced-contribution.html#comment-16965330</link><description>&lt;p&gt;I really liked your article. So far, I have never understood any license even after reading it several times; the language is just too compicated and scary.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;In fact I found your article because I was searching the answer for this simple question: If I use a software with Apache 2.0 license, can I just take it and modify it the way I please and then sell services on it as a proprietary platform?&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;The answer as I see it from your article is: Yes. But I still dont understand as to which particular sentence of the apache 2.0 license communicates this fact. If you can guide me to that, that will be great.&lt;/p&gt;</description><dc:creator xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">shashanky</dc:creator><pubDate>Sun, 20 Sep 2009 07:18:10 -0000</pubDate></item></channel></rss>