summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/public/fs-licensing-explanation.md
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorLuke Shumaker <LukeShu@sbcglobal.net>2013-10-13 16:26:12 -0400
committerLuke Shumaker <LukeShu@sbcglobal.net>2013-10-13 16:26:12 -0400
commit8303f7626e61d6aeadc5ccf04bda12474acb6cd5 (patch)
tree2703760be847bb3510f3ffbeea4dbdb0a9e2fb2f /public/fs-licensing-explanation.md
parent302323180f66e688b814c47197dc7adac99de679 (diff)
spell check
Diffstat (limited to 'public/fs-licensing-explanation.md')
-rw-r--r--public/fs-licensing-explanation.md2
1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions
diff --git a/public/fs-licensing-explanation.md b/public/fs-licensing-explanation.md
index df4f24d..3e30975 100644
--- a/public/fs-licensing-explanation.md
+++ b/public/fs-licensing-explanation.md
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ This is based on a post on [reddit][1], published on 2013-02-21.
> individual.
>
> [LiveCode is GPLv3, but also sells non-free licenses] Can you really
-> have the same code under two conflicting licences? Once licensed
+> have the same code under two conflicting licenses? Once licensed
> under GPL3 wouldn't they too be required to adhere to its rules?
I believe that GNU/the FSF has an FAQ that addresses this, but I can't